..srJ 
fs::: 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2007  with  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/ethicsofoldtestaOOmitcrich 


HANDBOOKS 

OF 

ETHICS  AND  RELIGION 

EDITED    BY 

SHAILER  MATHEWS 


The  series,  "Handbooks  of  Ethics  and 
Religion,*'  will  include  the  following  volumes 
in  addition  to  the  present  one: 

The  Psychology  of  Religion 

By  George  A.  Coe,  Professor  of  Prac- 
tical Theology  in  Union  Theological  Seminary 

The  Rise  of  the  New  Testament  Canon 
By  Edgar  J.  Goodspeed,  Associate  Pro- 
fessor of  Biblical  and  Patristic  Greek  in  the 
University  of  Chicago 

Christian  Ethics 

By  Gerald  B.  Smith,  Associate  Profes- 
sor of  Dogmatic  Theology  in  the  University 
of  Chicago 

Introduction  to  Religious  Education 

By  Theodore  G.  Scares,  Professor  ot 
Homiletics  and  Religious  Education  in  the 
University  of  Chicago 


THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD 
TESTAMENT 


THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CHICAGO  PRESS 
CHICAGO,  ILLINOIS 


Bgents 
THE  BAKER  &  TAYLOR  COMPANY 

NEW  TOBK 

THE  CAMBRIDGE  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 

LONDON   AND   BDINBUBGH 


THE 

ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD 

TESTAMENT 


By 

HINCKLEY  G.  MITCHELL 

u 

Profeupr  of  Hthrvw  and  Old  Testament 
Exegesis  in  Tufts  College 


THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CHICAGO  PRESS 
CHICAGO,  ILLINOIS 


Copyright  igia  By 
The  University  op  Chicago 

All  Rights  Reserved 

Published  October  1912 


Composed  and  Printed  By 

The  University  of  Chicago  Press 

Chicasro,  Illinois,  U.S.A. 


PREFACE 

There  are  at  least  two  ways  of  treating  such  a  sub- 
ject as  the  Ethics  of  the  Old  Testament.  One  might 
take  each  of  the  branches  or  topics  into  which  it  is 
divisible  in  their  order  and  trace  the  ideas  concerning 
them  held  or  taught  at  one  time  or  another  by  the 
Hebrews.  The  several  topics  could  thus  be  given  per- 
fect distinctness  and  the  progress  of  thought  with 
reference  to  them  could  be  made  convincingly  apparent. 
There  would,  however,  be  this  disadvantage,  that  the 
ideas  discussed  would  in  the  process  detach  themselves, 
not  only  from  one  another,  but  from  their  exponents, 
and  thus  lose  more  or  less  in  reality  and  interest  for  the 
average  reader.  In  this  book  I  have  sought  to  prevent 
such  a  result  by  adopting  the  method  of  discussing 
the  whole  subject,  with  its  various  branches,  in  a  suc- 
cession of  stages  and  especially  as  illustrated  in  the 
conduct  or  teaching  of  representative  Hebrews.  Any- 
one who  wishes  a  comprehensive  view  of  a  particular 
topic,  can  obtain  it  by  simply  piecing  together  my 
findings  thereon  in  the  successive  chapters. 

I  leave  it  to  the  reader,  also,  to  define  for  himself  the 
ethical  significance  of  the  Old  Testament  as  a  whole 
in  the  light  of  these  findings,  suggesting  only  that  while 
it  can  evidently  no  longer  be  regarded  as  "peculiar" 
for  "the  completeness  and  consistency  of  its  moraHty," 
and  therefore  infalHble,  its  surpassing  importance  as  a 
record  of  the  moral  development  of  the  Hebrews  and  a 
means  of  stimulation  to,  and  instruction  in,  right  con- 
duct must  always  be  recognized. 

vii 


viii  PREFACE 

In  the  Introduction  I  discuss  the  sources,  that  is, 
the  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  in  the  order  in  which 
they  appear  in  the  Hebrew  Bible.  When  I  proceed  to 
use  them  for  the  purpose  in  hand,  I  take  them,  some- 
times in  parts,  as  far  as  possible  in  chronological  order. 
There  are  cases  in  which  I  have  found  it  impossible  to 
follow  this  plan,  the  most  exceptional  being  that  of  the 
Book  of  Psalms,  which,  although  it  doubtless  contains 
some  much  earlier  pieces,  has  others  that  are  as  late 
as  any  other  book  in  the  Hebrew  canon.  I  have  there- 
fore discussed  it  by  itself  as  a  whole  in  the  closing 
chapter. 

A  word  should  be  said  about  the  quotations  from 
the  Scriptures.  They  will  not  always  sound  familiar. 
The  explanation  is  that,  when  I  have  quoted,  I  have 
generally  followed  the  American  Revision,  but  I  have 
sometimes  changed  it  where  I  found  it  unsatisfactory, 
and  sometimes  made  my  own  translation  or  adopted 
one  made  by  a  recognized  scholar.  In  no  case  have  I 
taken  such  Hberty  without  good  authority  for  the 
rendering  preferred.  The  passages  that  seemed  to  require 
correction  are  included  in  the  list  of  those  specially 
discussed  in  the  second  index. 


/- 


TABLE  OF   CONTENTS 

PAGE 

Introduction i 

CHAPTER 

I.    The  Hebrew  Point  of  View ii 

II.    The  Legendary  Period 19 

HI.    The  Patriarchal  Period 26 

IV.    The  Period  of  the  Exodus 44 

V.    The  Heroic  Period S3 

VI.    The  Period  of  David  and  Solomon  ...  63 
VII.    The  First  Century  of  the  Separate  King- 
doms    81 

VIII.    Amos  and  His  Times 93 

IX.    The  Ephraimite  Source 102 

1.  The  Ephraimite  Story  of  the  Patriarchs  .     .  102 

2.  The  Ephraimite  Account  of  the  Exodus   .  106 

3.  The  Ephraimite  Narrative  in  Joshua,  Judges, 

and  Samuel 119 

X.    HosEA  AND  His  Times 125 

XI.    Isaiah  and  Micah,  and  Their  Times  .     .     .  133 

1.  Isaiah 133 

2.  Micah 142 

XII.    Secondary   Elements   in   the   Judean   and 

Ephraimite  Narratives 147 

1.  The  Second  Yahwist  (J^)  in  the  Early  Chap- 
ters of  Genesis 147 

2.  Later  Judean  and  Ephraimite  Additions 
before  and  during  Compilation 150 

XIII.    The  Deuteronomic  Ethics 161 

1.  The  Book  of  Deuteronomy 161 

2.  The  Third  Decalogue 174 

3.  The  Secondary  Element  in  Deuteronomy  and 
the  Deuteronomic  Additions  to  the  Earlier 
Narratives 178 

ix 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS 


CHAPTER  PAGE 

XIV.  The  Prophecies  of  Zephaniah,  Habakkuk, 

AND  Nahum 189 

1.  Zephaniah 189 

2.  Habakkuk 191 

3.  Nahum 192 

XV.    Jeremiah  and  His  Times 194 

XVI.    The  Deuteronomic  Element  in  the  Books 

OF  Kings 213 

XVII.      EZEKIEL  AND  HiS  TiMES    .       .       .                      .       .  2l8 

XVIII.    The  Book  of  Lamentations 234 

XIX.    Isaiah,  Chaps.  40-55,  and  Related  Prophecies  236 

XX.    Haggai  and  Zecharlah,  and  Their  Times    .  249 

1.  Haggai 249 

2.  Zechariah 250 

XXI.    The  Priestly  Narrative           .     .     .  •  .     .  257 

XXII.    The  Prophecies  of  Isalui,  Chaps.  56h56,  and 
Related    Passages    in    Isaiah    and    Other 

Prophetical  Books 270 

XXni.    The  Prophecies  of  Obadiah  and  Malachi  .  284 

1.  Obadiah 284 

2.  Malachi 285 

^  XXIV.    The  Book  of  Ruth .290 

XXV.    The  Book  of  Job 292 

XXVI.    The  Books  of  Joel  and  Jonah     .     .     .     .  313 

1.  Joel 313 

2.  Jonah 314 

XXVII.    The  Book  of  Proverbs 316 

XXVIII.    The  Song  of  Solomon 345 

XXIX.    The  Books  of  Chronicles,  Ezra,  and  Ne- 

HEMiAH 349 

XXX.    The  Book  of  Ecclesiastes 362 

XXXI.    The  Books  of  Daniel  and  Esther    .     .     .  369 

1.  Daniel 369 

2.  Esther 372 

XXXII.    The  Book  of  Psalms 375 

Indexes 407 


INTRODUCTION 

The  Ethics  of  the  Old  Testament  has  always  been  a 


CORRECTIONS 

Page  III,  line  6,  after  21a,  insert  23. 

Page  III,  line  15,  omit  the  figures  from  22  to  26f.,  inclusive. 

Page  112,  line  6  from  below,  for  23  read  22. 

Page  124,  line  8,  read  Amalek. 

Page  124,  line  15,  read  Amalekites. 

Page  410,  column  2,  line  i,  for  22fT.  read  227f. 


criticism  has  shown  that  we  have  to  do,  not  with  a 
homogeneous  text,  but  with  the  work  of  two  or  more 
authors  writing  at  different  times  and  from  different 
standpoints.  The  critics,  however,  although  they  have 
solved  many  such  difficulties  and  made  a  scientific 
study  of  the  Old  Testament  possible,  have  added  to  the 
complexity  of  any  general  problem  by  showing  that, 
not  only  the  Hexateuch,  but  various  other  books,  are  of 
composite  origin  and  that  there  are  few  in  the  collection 
that  have  not  been  revised  and  enlarged  since  they  were 
written.  It  will  therefore  be  necessary  briefly  to  review 
their  findings  before  entering  upon  the  discussion  of  the 
proper  subject  of  this  volume. 

The  critical  analysis  of  the  Old  Testament  naturally 
began  with  the  Pentateuch.  Various  hypotheses  were 
proposed  and  abandoned.    The  one  that  is  now  most 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS 


CHAPTER 

XIV. 


PAGE 

The  Prophecies  of  Zephaniah,  Habakkuk, 

AND  Nahum 189 

1.  Zephaniah 189 

2.  Habakkuk 191 

^.  Nahum met 


XXIII.    The  Prophecies  of  Obadiah  and  Malachi  .  284 

1.  Obadiah 284 

2.  Malachi 285 

1^  XXIV.    The  Book  of  Ruth .290 

XXV.    The  Book  of  Job 292 

XXVI.    The  Books  of  Joel  and  Jonah     .     .     .     .  313 

I-  Joel 313 

2.  Jonah 314 

XXVII.    The  Book  of  Proverbs 316 

XXVIII.    The  Song  of  Solomon 345 

XXIX.    The  Books  of  Chronicles,  Ezra,  and  Ne- 

HEMIAH 349 

XXX.    The  Book  of  Eccleslastes 362 

XXXI.    The  Books  of  Daniel  and  Esther    .     .     .  369 

1.  Daniel 369 

2.  Esther 372 

XXXII.    The  Book  of  Psalms 375 

Indexes 407 


INTRODUCTION 

The  Ethics  of  the  Old  Testament  has  always  been  a 
perplexing  and  formidable  subject.  It  is  still  difficult, 
but  the  difficulties  that  now  present  themselves  are  not 
so  serious  as  they  once  seemed.  Thus,  the  thoughtful 
reader  of  Genesis  can  explain  the  fact  that  in  9 :  20  ff . 
Canaan  is  cursed  for  an  offense  of  which,  not  he,  but 
his  father,  has  been  guilty;  also  how  it  is  that  in  Josh. 
7:24  f.  the  children  of  Achan  have  to  suffer  with  him, 
although,  according  to  Deut.  24:16,  Moses  has  just 
ordained  that  "the  fathers  shall  not  be  put  to  death  for 
the  children,  neither  shall  the  children  be  put  to  death 
for  the  fathers.''  In  these  and  many  other  instances 
criticism  has  shown  that  we  have  to  do,  not  with  a 
homogeneous  text,  but  with  the  work  of  two  or  more 
authors  writing  at  different  times  and  from  different 
standpoints.  The  critics,  however,  although  they  have 
solved  many  such  difficulties  and  made  a  scientific 
study  of  the  Old  Testament  possible,  have  added  to  the 
complexity  of  any  general  problem  by  showing  that, 
not  only  the  Hexateuch,  but  various  other  books,  are  of 
composite  origin  and  that  there  are  few  in  the  collection 
that  have  not  been  revised  and  enlarged  since  they  were 
written.  It  will  therefore  be  necessary  briefly  to  review 
their  findings  before  entering  upon  the  discussion  of  the 
proper  subject  of  this  volume. 

The  critical  analysis  of  the  Old  Testament  naturally 
began  with  the  Pentateuch.  Various  hypotheses  were 
proposed  and  abandoned.    The  one  that  is  now  most 


2    ' ' '  ^  THE  :^THICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

generally  accepted  is  to  the  effect  that  the  first  five 
books  were  compiled  from  four  main  sources,  the  earliest 
being  a  Judean  writing  (J)  of  the  reign  of  Jehoshaphat 
(878-843  B.C.),  and  the  next  in  age  an  Ephraimite  work 
(E)  of  the  reign  of  Jeroboam  II  (785-745  B.C.).  These 
two  were  in  process  of  time  wrought  into  a  composite 
production;  but  not  before  650  B.C.,  when  both  of  them 
had  received  considerable  additions  by  later  hands. 
Meanwhile,  in  the  reign  of  Manasseh  (680-640  B.C.), 
there  had  been  produced  a  third  work,  a  form  of  Deuter- 
onomy (D),  which,  when  pubHshed  in  621  B.C.,  became 
the  program  for  the  reforms  undertaken  by  the  then 
king  Josiah.  It  was  added  to  the  previous  compilation 
early  in  the  Exile  (586-538  B.C.).  Finally,  during  and 
after  the  Exile  a  school  of  priestly  writers  (P),  from 
materials  new  and  old,  composed  a  fourth  writing, 
which  Ezra  in  458  B.C.  brought  with  him  from  Babylon 
and,  with  the  help  of  Nehemiah,  persuaded  the  Jews 
to  accept,  either  alone  or  as  a  part  of  the  practically 
completed  Pentateuch,  in  444  B.C.,  as  the  Law  of  God. 
If  it  was  not  then  united  with  the  earher  works,  it 
must  have  been  incorporated  with  them  before  400  B.C. 
The  bearing  of  this  theory  is  evident.  If  the  Penta- 
teuch is  not  the  work  of  Moses,  but  the  product  of 
a  later  process  of  development  lasting  until  the  middle 
or  end  of  the  fifth  century  B.C.,  it  loses  some,  at  least, 
of  the  value  it  has  been  supposed  to  have  as  a  source 
of  knowledge  concerning  the  patriarchal  age.  On  the 
other  hand,  however — and  this  should  never  be 
forgotten — ^it  acquires  a  new  importance  as  a  mirror 
of  thought  and  practice  among  the  Hebrews  of  the 
later  centuries. 


INTRODUCTION  3 

The  Jews  treated  the  first  five  books  of  their  Scrip- 
tures as  a  group  by  themselves.  The  second  division 
consisted  of  Joshua,  Judges,  Samuel,  and  Kings,  which 
they  called  ''The  Former  Prophets." 

The  Book  of  Joshua  is  largely  composed  of  the  same 
elements  as  the  Pentateuch,  to  which  a  form  of  it  was 
originally  attached.  The  source  D  is  the  only  one  that 
is  not  represented,  and  its  place  is  supplied  by  additions 
and  modifications  in  J  and  E  by  an  exiHc  editor  under 
the  influence  of  Deuteronomy. 

The  Priestly  story  closed  with  the  occupation  of 
Canaan.  Not  so  the  Judean  and  Ephraimite  narra- 
tives. They  both  went  through  the  Heroic  Period  of 
Hebrew  history,  and  many  hold  that  the  Book  of  Judges 
is  largely  composed  of  extracts  from  these  two  sources. 
It  was  re-edited  during  the  Exile,  when  1:1 — 2:5, 
9:1 — 10:5,  12:8-15,  17-21,  and  perhaps  chap.  16,  in 
their  original  forms,  were  omitted;  but  these  parts 
were  restored  by  a  still  later  editor. 

In  the  Books  of  Samuel,  originally  reckoned  as  one, 
the  hand  of  the  Deuteronomic  editor  seldom  appears,  the 
first  part,  and  the  first  chapter  of  the  second,  being 
mostly  a  compilation  from  J  and  E,  and  the  rest  of  the 
second  part  consisting  almost  entirely  of  extracts  from 
the  former  of  these  two  sources.  The  psalms  in  I  Sam., 
chap.  2,  and  II  Sam.,  chap.  22,  however,  are  late  addi- 
tions. 

The  Books  of  Kings,  too,  which  were  also  originally 
one,  were  compiled  from  various  sources,  among  which 
some  find  J  and  E  as  well  as  the  annals  of  Solomon 
(I  Kings  11:41)  and  the  more  frequently  mentioned 
chronicles  of  the  kings  of  Judah  (I  Kings  14:29)  and 


4  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

Israel  (I  Kings  14:19)/  In  its  present  form  it  shows 
traces  of  a  twofold  Deuteronomic  redaction,  one  before, 
and  the  other  during,  the  Exile.  There  are  also,  as  in 
the  case  of  the  Books  of  Samuel,  some  later  additions. 

In  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  "The  Former  Prophets" 
are  followed  by  "The  Later  Prophets,"  that  is,  the 
prophetical  books,  properly  so  called,  the  first  of  which 
is  Isaiah. 

The  distinction  between  a  first  and  a  second  Isaiah 
is  famihar  to  students  of  the  Old  Testament.  The 
book  that  bears  this  name,  however,  has  had  a  more 
complex  history  than  these  titles  would  indicate,  for 
even  in  chaps.  1-39  there  are  not  only  briefer  passages, 
but  whole  chapters,  that  are  not  of  Isaian  authorship. 
The  most  important  are  2:2-4;  10:16-27;  11:10 — 
12:6;  13:1—14:23;  15:1—16:12;  19;  21:1-15;  23- 
27;  29:16-24;  30:18-26;  32:1-8,  15-20,  and  33-39- 
Some  of  these  passages  were  added  during  the  Exile, 
but  more  are  of  a  still  later  date.  The  second  part  of 
the  book  can  none  of  it  be  attributed  to  Isaiah,  chaps. 
40-55  having  evidently  been  written  toward  the  end  of 
the  Exile,  and  much,  if  not  all,  of  the  rest  after  the 
Restoration. 

The  Book  of  Jeremiah  tells,  in  part,  its  own  story. 
In  chap.  36  it  reports  that  in  605  B.C.  the  prophet  was 

*In  the  Greek  version  the  substance  of  I  Kings  8:12  f.  is  inserted 
after  8:53,  and  the  quotation  is  followed  by  the  statement,  under  the 
form  of  a  question,  that  the  words  quoted  are  "written  in  the  Book  of 
Song."  Wellhausen  suggests  that  the  Hebrew  original  of  this  state- 
ment had,  not  ^^W,  "song,"  but  *1TD'»,  "Jashar";  in  other  words,  that 
here  is  another  reference  to  the  ancient  collection  of  poems  quoted  by 
J  in  Josh.  10: 13  and  II  Sam.  i :  18.    See  Cornill,  Introduction,  207  f. 


INTRODUCTION  S 

directed  to  put  the  words  that  he  had  thus  far  spoken 
into  writing,  and  that  the  next  year,  when  the  book 
prepared  by  his  disciple  Baruch  had  been  burned  by  the 
king  of  Judah,  he  made  a  second  copy,  to  which  he 
added  ^'many  Uke  words."  The  substance  of  these 
prophecies  is  doubtless  contained  in  the  book  that  bears 
his  name,  but  they  constitute  only  a  part  of  its  contents. 
In  the  first  place,  there  are  other  prophecies  of  a  later 
date  that  can  safely  be  attributed  to  him.  Secondly, 
there  is  a  series  of  sections  in  which,  not  the  discourses, 
but  the  experiences  of  the  prophet  are  narrated  in  the 
third  person.  Finally,  there  are  many  brief  passages, 
and  some  whole  sections,  that  were  evidently  not  added 
by  Jeremiah  himself  or  his  disciple,  but  by  later  and,  in 
some  cases,  much  later  writers.  The  extent  to  which 
this  book  has  been  enlarged  in  comparatively  recent 
times  appears  from  the  fact  that,  according  to  Cornill, 
about  an  eighth  of  it  is  wanting  in  the  Greek  Version. 

The  Book  of  Ezekiel,  unlike  the  two  preceding, 
although  it  has  suffered  at  the  hands  of  transcribers, 
has  not  been  enlarged  except  by  occasional  glosses,  and 
therefore  is  substantially  in  the  form  given  to  it  by  its 
author. 

The  books  of  the  Minor  Prophets  are  not  arranged 
in  the  order  of  their  origin.  Nor  have  they  been  pre- 
served in  their  original  forms.  Hosea,  one  of  the  oldest, 
is  also  one  of  those  that  have  suffered  most,  in  the  opinion 
of  biblical  critics,  at  the  hands  of  revisers.  Thus,  in 
its  title  the  date  has  apparently  been  copied  in  part  from 
the  first  verse  of  Isaiah,  and  there  are  various  other 
additions,  most  of  which  were  intended  to  relieve  the 
severity  of  the  prophet's  original  discourses. 


6  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

The  Book  of  Joel,  on  the  other  hand,  the  date  of 
which  is  not  far  from  400  B.C.,  seems  to  have  been 
transmitted  almost  as  it  was  written. 

In  Amos  (760  B.C.),  the  oldest  of  all  these  shorter 
prophetical  productions,  there  are  certain  passages  that 
are  regarded  by  many  scholars  as  accretions.  The 
most  important  is  9:86-15,  but  the  removal  of  all  of 
these  verses  only  renders  the  teaching  of  the  prophet 
more  consistent  and  forcible. 

The  Book  of  Obadiah,  although  it  is  the  briefest 
in  the  Old  Testament,  has  not  escaped  the  notice  of  the 
reviser.  Indeed,  there  are  those  who  claim  that  only 
about  half  of  it  can  be  attributed  to  the  original  author, 
a  prophet  of  the  first  half  of  the  fifth  century  before 
the  Christian  era. 

The  Book  of  Jonah  is  not  properly  a  prophetical 
work,  but  a  parable  in  the  historical  form,  later  than 
the  time  of  Nehemiah,  into  which  a  still  later  psalm 
of  unknown  origin,  2 :  i-io,  has  been  inserted. 

Micah  presents  a  problem  to  which,  as  yet,  there 
is  no  generally  accepted  solution.  The  first  three 
chapters,  with  the  exception  of  three  or  four  verses, 
may  safely  be  attributed  to  the  traditional  author,  a 
younger  contemporary  of  Isaiah,  and  less  confidently  a 
few  verses  of  chaps.  4  and  5.  If  6 :  i — 7 : 6  is  genuine,  as 
is  still  maintained,  it  must  have  been  written  at  a 
later  date.  Among  the  interpolated  passages  is  a  bril- 
liant picture  of  the  messianic  era,  4 : 1-4,  which  is  found 
in  a  briefer  form  in  the  second  chapter  of  Isaiah.  The 
other  additions  are  of  the  same  encouraging  character. 

The  prophecies  of  Nahum  have  been  preserved  in 
substantially  their  original  form,  but  the  psalm,  found 


INTRODUCTION  7 

in  1:2-8,  12  f.,  15,  and  2:2,  which  has  been  prefixed 
to  them  must  have  been  composed  long  after  the  fall 
of  Nineveh. 

The  prophecies  of  Habakkuk,  also,  seem  originally 
to  have  been  directed  against  Nineveh,  but  by  the 
removal  of  1:5-11  from  its  proper  place  after  2:4  it 
was  made  to  appear  that  the  Chaldeans  were  the  offend- 
ing nation.  At  the  end  of  the  book  is  a  later  psalm, 
taken  from  a  collection  otherwise  unknown,  extolling 
Yahweh,  the  God  of  the  Hebrews. 

The  prophet  Zephaniah  preceded  both  Nahum  and 
Habakkuk,  but  some  parts  of  the  book  that  bears  his 
name  have  been  referred  to  a  later  date.  The  most 
important  are  2:8-11  and  3:14-20,  neither  of  which 
can  have  been  written  before  the  Exile. 

The  prophecies  of  Haggai,  delivered  in  520  B.C., 
were  intended  to  encourage  his  people.  Hence  it  was 
not  necessary  to  revise  or  supplement  them  in  order 
to  adapt  them  to  the  needs  of  later  generations.  In 
point  of  fact,  they  have  not  undergone  changes  of  any 
importance. 

The  same  can  be  said  of  the  first  eight  chapters  of 
the  Book  of  Zechariah;  but  the  last  six  chapters  are 
considerably  later,  having  been  written  by  at  least 
four  different  persons  during  the  Greek  period. 

The  Book  of  Malachi  is  entirely  a  product  of  the 
critical  period  immediately  preceding  the  introduction 
of  the  Priestly  legislation. 

The  fourth,  and  last,  division  in  the  Hebrew  Scrip- 
tures is  that  of  "The  Writings,'^  or,  as  the  Greeks  called 
them,  "The  Hagiographa." 


8  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

The  first  of  these  sacred  writings  is  the  Book  of  the 
Psalms,  which  consists  of  five  parts  corresponding  to 
the  five  books  of  the  Pentateuch.  Many  (73)  of  the 
pieces  composing  the  book  are  attributed  to  David, 
but  the  titles  are  untrustworthy  and  lack  the  support 
of  either  external  or  internal  evidence.  Indeed,  such 
evidence  as  there  is  indicates  that  most,  if  not  aU,  of 
the  psalms  are  of  post-exilic  origin  and  some  of  them 
as  late  as  the  Maccabean  period. 

The  Book  of  Proverbs,  Hke  that  of  the  Psalms,  is 
evidently  the  product  of  a  gradual  compilation.  It 
contains  two  principal  and  four  supplementary  col- 
lections, with  distinct  titles,  to  which  is  prefixed  a 
dissertation  on  Wisdom.  The  general  title,  1:1,  makes 
Solomon  the  author  of  the  whole  book,  but  it  is  con- 
tradicted by  some  of  the  subtitles;  for,  although  10:  i — 
22:16,  25:1 — 29:27  are  attributed  to  the  great  king, 
22:17 — 24:22  and  24:23-34  are  entitled  ''The  Words  of 
the  Wise,"  while  chap.  30  contains  *'The  Words  of  Agur 
the  son  of  Jakeh,"  and  chap.  31,  in  part,  "The  Words 
of  King  Lemuel.'^  The  internal  evidence,  the  style  of 
thought  and  expression,  warrants  one  in  going  farther 
and  questioning  whether  any  part  of  the  book  was 
actually  written  by  Solomon.  The  tendency  is  to  bring 
the  oldest  down  into  the  fourth  century  before  Christ, 
and  the  rest  to  various  dates  in  the  Greek  period. 

In  the  Book  of  Job  there  must  be  distinguished  a 
story  of  the  patriarch,  found  in  the  framework,  which 
was  current  among  the  Hebrews  before  the  Exile,^  and 
the  great  poem  founded  upon  it.  The  date  of  the  latter, 
which  can  only  be  determined  by  internal  evidence,  is 

'  Ezek.  14:14,  20. 


INTRODUCTION  9 

plausibly  fixed  at  about  the  middle  of  the  fifth  century 
before  the  Christian  era,  but  the  speeches  of  EHhu  in 
chaps.  32-37  may  be  somewhat  later. 

The  Song  of  Solomon  is  not,  as  has  been  supposed,  a 
literary  unit,  but  a  collection  of  songs  such  as  were 
simg  by  the  Hebrews  during  the  celebration  of  their 
weddings,  when  the  bridegroom  was  king,  and  the 
bride  queen,  of  the  revels.  Indeed,  he  was  hailed  as 
Solomon,'  while  she,  for  the  time  being  the  fairest  of 
women,  was  called  "the  Shulamite,"^  after  the  damsel 
who  ministered  to  David  in  his  last  days.^  The  name 
Solomon,  therefore,  is  of  no  value  as  evidence  of  the  date 
of  the  book,  which,  since  it  shows  traces  of  Greek  as  well 
as  Persian  influence,  can  hardly  have  been  composed 
before  the  time  of  Alexander. 

The  Book  of  Ruth  purports  to  be  a  story  from  the 
period  of  the  Judges,  but  it  is  without  doubt  a  fictitious 
narrative  written,  in  protest  against  the  exclusivenes; 
represented  by  Ezra,  about  450  B.C. 

The  Book  of  Lamentations,  though  not  written,  as 
was  formerly  believed,  by  Jeremiah,  was  composed,  in 
part  at  least,  soon  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem, 
and  completed  before  the  end  of  the  Exile. 

Ecclesiastes,  so  far  from  being  a  work  of  Solomon, 
is  a  pseudograph  which  is  supposed  to  have  been  written 
rather  early  in  the  Greek  period,  perhaps  about  250 
B.C.  It  therefore  mirrors  the  result  of  a  hospitable 
attitude  toward  things  foreign,  while  the  Book  of 
Esther,  the  latest  of  the  Hagiographa,  voices  the  fanati- 
cal hatred  and  contempt  with  which  the  Jews  regarded 

'  Cant.  3:75.  5  1  Kings  i :3  f. 

'Cant.  6:13. 


lO  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

other  peoples  after  they  had  achieved  their  independ- 
ence under  the  Maccabees. 

The  date  of  Daniel  is  164  B.C.,  when  the  Jews, 
although  they  had  cleansed  the  sanctuary,  were  still 
beset  on  all  sides  by  enemies  and  were  in  dire  need  of 
inspiration  and  encouragement. 

The  last  four  books  of  the  Hebrew  canon  were 
originally  one  work,  the  order  then  being.  Chronicles, 
Ezra,  and  Nehemiah.  The  date  of  the  compiler  is 
about  300  B.C.,  but  he  copied  freely  from  the  books  of 
Samuel  and  Kings  and  sometimes  made  use  of  earher 
authorities.  In  that  part  of  his  narrative  devoted  to 
the  Restoration  he  seems  to  have  copied  largely  from 
the  personal  memoirs  of  the  two  leaders. 

It  is  clear  from  the  above  analysis  that  the  contents 
of  the  Old  Testament  are  not  arranged  in  the  order  of 
their  origin.  But  it  is  equally  clear  that,  if  one  would 
get  a  comprehensive  view  of  their  teaching  on  any 
subject,  they  must  be  studied  in  their  chronological 
relations.  This,  therefore,  will  be  the  method  adopted 
in  the  following  pages. 


CHAPTER  I 
THE  HEBREW  POINT  OF  VIEW 

The  discussion  of  the  contents  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment in  chronological  order  makes  possible  a  connected 
historical  survey  of  their  ethical  teachings,  but  before 
such  a  study  is  undertaken,  it  will  be  best  to  consider 
briefly  the  attitude  of  the  Hebrews  with  reference  to 
ethics  in  general. 

In  the  first  place,  it  is  taken  for  granted  by  their 
literary  representatives  that  man  is  a  moral  being. 
There  is  only  one  passage,  and  that  a  comparatively 
early  one,  in  which  the  subject  is  discussed,  namely 
Gen.,  chap.  3.  This  remarkable  story  teaches  that  man 
was  not  originally  endowed  with  the  faculty  for  making 
ethical  distinctions.  It  is  based  on  the  idea  that  child- 
hood is  the  ideal  state,  and  that,  therefore,  Yahweh, 
although  he  was  obliged  to  give  the  first  human  beings 
fully  developed  bodies,  withheld  the  gift  that  would 
have  made  them  independent,  in  a  sense,  and  morally 
responsible.  They  are  reported'  to  have  acquired  the 
missing  faculty,  not  as  a  subsequent  divine  endowment 
or  natural  development,  but  through  the  magical 
influence  of  a  tree  of  which,  although  he  had  planted 
it  "in  the  midst  of  the  garden,"  he  had  forbidden  them 
to  eat  the  fruit.  They  were  punished  for  disobeying 
him  by  being  made  thenceforth  subject  to  toil,  pain,  and 
death;  but  he  did  not  deprive  them  of  the  new  power 
that  they  had  acquired,  which  thus,  like  the  penalties 
decreed,  became  the  heritage  of  the  human  race. 


12  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

There  are  no  references  or  allusions  to  this  story 
by  later  writers  in  the  Old  Testament.  They  might 
have  cited  it  to  justify  God's  severity  toward  peoples 
other  than  the  Hebrews,  whom,  these  writers  taught, 
he  held  responsible  for  their  conduct,  in  spite  of  the 
fact  that  they  had  no  direct  and  express  revelation  to 
guide  or  warn  them.  The  best  illustrations  of  this 
doctrine  are  found  in  the  prophecies  of  Amos,  who,  in 
his  first  two  chapters,  arraigns  the  peoples  surrounding 
the  Hebrews  one  after  another  and  condemns  them  for 
the  violation,  not  of  distinct  divine  commands,  but  of 
the  instinctive  dictates  of  humanity.  It  is  possible 
that  Amos,  in  2:95.,  intended  to  accuse  Israel  also  of 
universally  recognized  offenses,  but  this  is  not  his  whole 
meaning.  The  Hebrews  claimed  to  stand  in  a  peculiar 
relation  to  Yahweh,  a  relation  so  close  that  they  were 
not  obliged  to  rely  on  their  own  wisdom,  but,  when 
uncertain  which  course  to  follow,  might  hear  a  voice 
saying,  "This  is  the  way ;  walk  ye  in  it."^  They  believed 
that  he  had  often  spoken  to  the  fathers  in  this  way,  and 
that,  when  their  ears  became  dull,  he  had  still  continued 
to  speak  to  them  through  his  prophets.  In  2:11  Amos 
reminds  Israel  of  the  prophets  that  have  arisen  among 
them.  When,  therefore,  he  condemns  them,  it  is  for 
disobeying  the  voice  of  Yahweh  as  well  as  their  own 
best  impulses. 

In  view  of  what  has  just  been  said  it  is  not  surprising 
that,  in  Isa.  30: 20,  Yahweh  should  be  called  his  people's 
"Teacher,"*  and  in  the  same  connection  the  words  of 

^Isa.  30:21. 

»The  Hebrew  word  is  plural  in  form,  and  is  so  rendered  in  the 
English  Version,  but  the  construction  shows  that  here,  as  in  54:5 


THE  HEBREW  POINT  OF  VIEW  13 

the  prophets  be  denominated  his  "teaching,"  or,  as  the 
English  Version  has  it,  his  "law."^  Nor  is  this  all.  In 
process  of  time  not  only  the  ethical  precepts  of  the 
prophets,  but  the  legal  precedents  and  the  ceremonial 
prescriptions  inherited  from  the  past,  were  brought 
under,  the  same  category.  Thus  in  II  Kings  22:8  the 
term  "law"  is  applied  to  Deuteronomy,  and  in  Neh. 
8 : 2  ff .  to  the  entire  legislation  of  the  Pentateuch.  In 
other  words,  the  entire  life  of  the  Hebrews,  personal 
and  social,  was  finally  viewed  and  res^ulateH  ffftip  <-lip 
^religious  standpoint 

From  this  standpoint  the  law  of  good-will  assumes 
a  peculiar  character  and  importance.  It  is  a  fundamen- 
tal principle  of  ethics  that  the  quality  of  an  act  depends 
upon  the  attitude  of  the  will  with  reference  to  it.  If 
the  given  act  is  approved  by  the  ethical  judgment,  the 
will  should  at  once  require  its  performance;  but,  if, 
on  the  other  hand,  it  is  condemned,  the  will  should  as 
promptly  forbid  its  further  contemplation.  When  these 
requirements  are  fulfilled,  the  result  in  either  case  is  a 
certain  satisfaction  with  one's  self  and  expectation  of 
approval  by  one's  fellows.  Indeed,  the  will  is  recog- 
nized  as  so  important  a  factor  in  such  matters  that  one 
is  not  generally  given  credit  for  doing  right  unless  one 
chooses  the  rightl^f igtit  and  shuns  the  wrong  as  wrong; 
and,  on  the  other  hand,  one  is  not  condemnedj_if, 
choosing  the  right,  one  is  led  to  do  that  which  is  wrong 
tlirough  a  mistake  of  judgment.  The  Hebrews  recog- 
nized this  principle,  and  their  Scriptures  furnish  some 
good  examples  of  its  application.     Thus,  in  the  story 

("thy  Maker"),  the  descriptive  participle  really  denotes  a  single  indi- 
vidual, and  that  the  Deity. 
» Vs.  9. 


14  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

of  the  seizure  of  Sarah  by  Abimelech/  when  God  warns 
the  king  of  the  danger  to  which  he  has  exposed  himself 
by  appropriating  Abraham's  wife,  Abimelech  replies, 
"Wilt  thou  slay  even  a  righteous  nation?"^  supporting 
his  protest  by  insisting  that  he  has  done  what  he  has 
done  in  integrity  of  heart,  that  is,  with  an  upright 
intention,  and  therefore  with  innocency  of  hands,  that  is, 
without  incurring  real  guilt;  and  God  admits  his  conten- 
tion. There  is  another  illustration  of  the  principle  in 
question  in  the  law  touching  homicide.  The  earliest  legis- 
lation required  that  the  wilful  murderer  be  summarily 
put  to  death,  but  prescribed  that  the  man  who  killed 
another  by  accident  be  protected  from  the  resentment 
of  the  relatives  of  his  unintentional  victim,  and  the 
later  laws  on  the  subject  reaffirmed  this  distinction.^ 
Thus  far  there  seems  to  be  nothing  pecuHar  in  the 
Hebrew  idea  and  application  of  the  law  of  good-will. 
When,  however,  one  recalls  that  the  law  concerning 
murder  is  a  part  of  a  code  that  the  Hebrews  beUeved 
to  have  been  dictated  by  God  himself,  it  becomes  clear 
that  a  violation  of  it  could  not  but  seem  to  them  defiance 
of  the  Deity;  and  what  is  true  of  this  law  applies  to 
every  other  least  prescription  referred  to  God  in  the 
Old  Testament.  On  the  other  hand,  obedience  to  these 
laws  was  interpreted  as  an  expression  of  devotTonT  and 
loyalty,  not  to  an  ideal  or  to  other  human  beings,  but 
to  the  divine  Lawgiver. 

'  Gen.,  chap.  20. 

'The  word  rendered  "nation"  might  be  dropped  without  injury 
to  the  sense,  which  would  then  be,  "Wilt  thou  slay  even  a  righteous 
man?" 

3Exod.  21:13  f.;  Deut.  igiiff.;  Num.3S:ioff. 


/pN  THE  HEBREW  POINT  OF  VlE.V  15 

^ —  The  connection  between  ethics  and  religion  among 
the  Hebrews  was  strengthened  by  their  behef  in^a^ 
~pecuIIaT''"Teratron'T)e^t^^  tliem  and  Yahweh.  They 
"did  not,  after  the  manner  of  other  peoples,  represent 
this  relation  as  natural,  but  as  voluntary,  the  result 
of  a  covenant  solemnly  ratified  by  both  parties.  They 
claimed  that  it  was  originally  made  with  Abraham/ 
and  renewed  with  Isaac^  and  Jacob,^  and,  finally,  with 
the  fugitive  people  descended  from  these  patriarchs, 
at  Sinai."*  By  it  they  were  bound  to  exclusive  devotion 
to  Yahweh,  and  to  certain  observances  which  mani- 
fested and  emphasized  their  adherence  to  him.  These  / 
requirements,  which  were  probably  ten  in  number,  are  / 
found  in  their  earliest  form  in  Exod.,  ciiap.  34  iNohe 
of  them  were  in  themselves  ethical  in  character,  but, 
as  the  terms  of  a  covenant,  they  acquired  an  ethical 
significance;  that  is,  the  fulfilment  of  them  argued 
loyalty,  and  the  disregard  of  them  disloyalty,  to  an 
express  agreement.  So  profoundly  did  the  prophets 
feel  this  that  they  did  not  hesitate  to  speak  of  the  wor- 
ship of  other  gods,  which  was  forbidden  by  the  first 
article  of  the  covenant,  as  adultery.^  Naturally  the 
neglect  of  any  of  the  other  articles  was  only  less  culpable. 
Thus,  while^the  Hebrews  seldom  distinguished  between 
ethics  and  religion,  their  religion,  from  an  early  date^^ 


how  early*  it  may  not  be  possible  to  determine — :was 
shot  through  with  an  ethical  quality. 

The  form  into  which  the  Hebrews  put  the  ideals  by 
which  they  were  led,  also,  was  influenced  by  their  idea 

'  Gen.  15 : 1  ff.  s  Gen.  28: 13. 

"Gen.  26:24.  4  Exod.  34:27. 

sHos.  1:2;  Jer.  3:1;  Ezek.  23:12. 


i6  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

of  God  and  his  relation  to  them.  This  is  illustrated  in 
the  story  of  the  migration  of  Abraham.  One  might 
explain  it  as  prompted  by  a  spirit  of  adventure,  or 
occasioned  by  a  political  upheaval  such  as  occurred 
when  the  Kassites  invaded  Babylonia,  but  neither  of 
these  is  the  Hebrew  view  of  the  matter.  The  Judean 
narrative^  says  that  it  was  suggested,  or  rather,  com- 
manded, by  Yahweh,  and  that  the  patriarch  was  induced 
to  undertake  it  by  a  promise  from  his  God  of  a  numerous 
and  fortunate  posterity.  This  ideal  is  represented  as 
the  lodestar,  not  only  of  Abraham,  but  of  all  the  rest 
of  the  patriarchs.  In  process  of  time,  as  will  appear, 
it  was  modified  and  enlarged,  but  it  was  always  repre- 
sented, not  as  a  human  conception,  developed  by 
experience  and  reflection,  but  as  a  divine  plan  and 
purpose,  more  and  more  clearly  unfolded  by  his  suc- 
cessive spokesmen.  Naturally  the  sanctions  by  which 
these  teachers  sought  to  reinforce  the  influence  of  the 
ideals  presented  took  a  corresponding  form.  The 
good,  submissive  will,  they  assured  their  people,  would 
be  rewarded  by  the  fulfilment  of  the  inherited  promise, 
but  the  evil,  contrary  will  would  be  punished  by  mis- 
fortunes as  dreadful  as  the  blessings  offered  were  attract- 
ive. The  inducements  to  submission  to  the  divine 
direction  are  repeatedly  set  forth  in  the  Hebrew  Scrip- 
tures, at  greatest  length  in  Deut.,  chap.  28,  where  the 
penalties  for  a  contrary  spirit  are  presented  with  even 
greater  particularity.  It  should,  however,  be  noted, 
that  in  only  a  few  late  passages^  is  there  any  indication 
that  the  rewards  and  penalties  promised  and  threatened, 

^  Gen.  12:1  £f. 

*Ps.  49:14!.;  73:26;  Isa.  26:19;  Dan.  i2:2f. 


THE  HEBREW  POINT  OF  VIEW  17 

or  any  part  of  them,  would  be  reserved  for  a  future 
life. 

The  Hebrew  ideas  of  God  and  duty,  as  above  out- 
lined, at  first  sight  seem  unobjectionable;  for  the  theist 
must  confess  that,  in  the  last  analysis,  the  voice  of 
duty  is  the  voice  of  God,  and  also  that  the  good  will 
must  inform  and  control  the  ideal  Hfe;  but  anyone  who 
looks  a  Uttle  closely  into  the  matter  will  be  constrained 
to  object  that  a  system  requiring  that  the  good  will 
manifest  itself  in  certain  ways  prescribed  for  every 
phase  of  Kfe  was  mistaken  and  possibly  mischievous. 
The  prophets  early  saw  this  and  entered  their  protest. 
Thus  Amos,  strongly  as  he  insisted  upon  justice  and 
mercy  and  other  moral  qualities,  refused  to  recognize 
the  forms  of  religion  practiced  in  his  day  as  obligatory, 
and  the  greatest  of  his  successors  taught  the  same 
doctrine.'  In  8:8  Jeremiah  boldly  accuses  the  scribes 
of  wielding  a  "false  pen,'^  in  other  words,  of  insert- 
ing into  the  law  requirements  for  which  they  had  no 
authority  from  Yahweh;  a  remonstrance  that  reminds 
one  of  Peter's,  when  he  said  at  the  conference  at  Jeru- 
salem, "Why  make  ye  trial  of  God,  by  putting  upon 
the  necks  of  the  disciples  a  yoke  that  neither  our  fathers 
nor  we  were  able  to  bear  ?"^ 

It  appears,  then,  that  the  Hebrews  seldom  distin- 
guished between  ethics  and  religion,  but  that,  by  a 
pecuHar  view  of  their  relation  to  Yahweh,  some  of  them 
gave  an  ethical  significance  to  things  indifferent.  The 
distinction  in  question,  however,  exists,  and,  as  for 
things  indifferent,  the  great  prophets  warrant  one  in 

^Isa.  itioff.;  Jer.  7:2if. 
^  Acts  15:10. 


iS  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

treating  them  as  such.  In  the  following  pages,  there- 
fore, the  attempt  will  be  made  to  discuss  the  teaching 
of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  concerning  man's  duties  to 
himself  and  to  his  fellows,  whether  in  the  smaller  circle 
of  the  family  or  the  larger  one  of  society.  The  material 
for  such  a  study  is  found  in  its  purest  form  in  the  express 
precepts  and  regulations  for  the  conduct  of  Hfe  in  which 
the  Old  Testament  abounds.  The  exhortations  and 
denunciations  of  the  prophets  also  contain  a  large 
ethical  element  that  is  of  great  interest  and  importance. 
The  historical  books,  most  of  which  were  regarded  as 
prophetical  by  the  Hebrews,  reveal  the  moral  standards 
of  their  authors  in  the  manner  in  which  they  treat  the 
persons  and  events  therein  described.  Finally,  the 
so-called  poetical  books,  as  an  expression  of  the  inner 
Hfe  of  their  authors,  furnish  interesting  data  for  the 
periods  to  which  they  belong.  When  the  material  thus 
gathered  has  been  arranged  in  the  order  of  its  age, 
it  should  show  whether,  and  to  what  extent,  the  He- 
brews made  progress,  during  the  period  covered  by  the 
Old  Testament,  in  their  ethical  ideas  and  requirements. 


CHAPTER  II 

THE  LEGENDARY  PERIOD 

The  way  has  now  been  cleared  for  an  intelligent 
study  of  the  ethical  teaching  of  the  Old  Testament. 
The  method  proposed,  as  already  intimated,  is  the 
historical  one.  In  one  period  after  another  search  is 
to  be  made  for  data  on  the  subject,  and  the  stage  of 
progress  of  which  these  data  give  evidence  determined. 

The  first  period  naturally  extends  from  the  origin 
of  the  race  to  the  Flood,  as  described  in  the  Book  of 
Genesis.  The  chapters  devoted  to  this  period  present 
a  dramatic  picture,  relating  how  mankind,  having 
acquired  the  capacity  for  knowing  good  from  evil, 
instead  of  employing  it  in  the  development  of  moral 
character,  neglected  it  to  such  an  extent  that  they 
gradually  deteriorated  and  finally  became  morally  so 
offensive  to  their  Maker  that  he  destroyed  them  with 
the  exception  of  a  single  family.  If,  now,  these  chapters 
were  a  homogeneous  narrative,  written  in  the  period 
with  which  they  deal  or  based  on  well-authenticated 
records  or  traditions,  it  would  be  a  simple  matter  to 
learn  and  show  how  far  mankind  had  then  progressed 
in  morals.  This,  however,  is  not  the  case.  In  the 
first  place,  the  narrative  is  evidently  composite,  con- 
sisting of  extracts  from  three  distinct  sources,  with 
some  editorial  material;  and,  secondly,  as  has  been 
stated  in  another  connection,  none  of  these  sources,  as 
a  whole,  can  safely  be  dated  earlier  than  the  ninth 
century  before  the  Christian  era.     The  oldest  is  the 

19 


20  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

Judean  narrative,  which  doubtless  contained  much  that 
had  existed  in  some  form  for  an  indefinite  period. 
From  it  were  taken  Gen.  2:4b-7,  8  f.*,  i6,  17*,  18-25; 
3:1-19,  21,  23*;  4:1,  i6b,  17*,  18^24;  5:29;  6:1  f., 
4;  9:20  f.,  22*,  23-25,  26*,  27.'  These  chapters,  when 
read  in  their  original  order  (with  9:20-27  after  5:29), 
present  a  picture  of  the  primitive  world,  not,  indeed, 
as  it  really  was,  but  as  the  early  Hebrews  conceived  it. 
It  is  a  very  different  picture  from  that  which  one  gets 
from  the  composite  narrative.  Cain,  the  great  wrong- 
doer, has  disappeared,  and  there  is  no  deluge  in  it  to 
emphasize  the  justice  of  the  divine  government.  Man 
as  a  race  is  represented,  not  as  being  borne  on  a  tide  of 
passion  and  violence  to  an  early  and  almost  total  destruc- 
tion, but  as  boldly  taking  possession  of  the  world  in 
which  he  finds  himself  and  attacking  the  secret  of  its 
adaptation  to  his  comfort  and  advantage.  Cain  learns 
how  to  make  the  soil  furnish  him  sustenance,  Enoch, 
his  son,  how  to  protect  himself  with  walls  and  battle- 
ments;* the  three  sons  of  Lemech  open  as  many  new 
avenues  for  human  endeavor  by  domesticating  the  most 
useful  animals,  inventing  instruments  of  music,  and 
fashioning  the  metals  into  useful  implements;  and, 
finally,  Noah  adds  wine  as  his  contribution  to  the 
resources  of  the  expanding  race.  The  author  of  this 
story,  although  it  is  he  to  whom  we  are  indebted  for  the 
account  of  the  origin  of  the  moral  faculty  in  chap.  3, 
introduces  these  later  incidents,  not  to  point  a  moral, 

*The  asterisk  (*)  indicates  that  the  verses  thus  marked  have 
undergone  material  changes. 

'The  natural  subject  of  the  verb  "builded"  in  4:17  is  Enoch; 
hence  it  must  have  been  he  who  gave  its  name  to  the  city,  even  "his 
own  name,  Enoch." 


THE  LEGENDARY  PERIOD  2i 

but,  for  their  own  sake,  as  items  in  the  supposed  history 
of  civilization.  He  gives  them,  therefore,  as  they 
occur  to  him,  almost  without  comment,  letting  the 
people  who  figure  in  them  speak  for  themselves,  and 
the  reader  draw  his  own  conclusions.  Still,  it  is  possible, 
by  carefully  noting,  not  only  what  he  says,  but  what  he 
omits  to  say,  to  gather  some  idea  of  what  he  thought 
about  the  moral  development  of  mankind  before  the 
time  of  Abraham. 

The  first  incident  to  be  considered,  because  it 
involves  the  question  of  personal  morality,  is  that  of 
Noah  and  Canaan  in  9:20-27.  Now,  there  can  be  no 
doubt  that  the  author  intended  to  represent  the  dis- 
covery of  wine  as  beneficial  to  mankind.  This  is  clear 
from  the  fact  that  it  is  introduced  in  terms  that  relate 
it  to  the  achievements  previously  recorded;  for  9:20 
should  be  rendered,  not  as  in  the  English  Version, 
"And  Noah  began  to  be  an  husbandman,  and  [he] 
planted  a  vineyard,"  but  "And  Noah,  the  husbandman, 
planted  the  first  vineyard";  but  it  is  placed  beyond 
question  by  5 :  29,  where  the  child  Noah  is  hailed  as  the 
comforter  of  his  race.  It  is  also  clear  that  Noah  is  not 
condemned  for  drinking  to  excess.  The  Judean  writer 
could  not  consistently  censure  him,  since  in  43:34  he 
reports  without  a  sign  of  disapproval  that  even  Joseph 
and  his  brothers  drank  to  intoxication.  He  does, 
however,  condemn,  and  strongly,  personal  impurity; 
for  Canaan,  who,  according  to  the  original  of  the  story, 
"saw  the  nakedness  of  his  father,"  represents  the 
Canaanites,  whom  Yahweh,  on  accoimt  of  their  notorious 
impurity,  finally  delivered  into  the  hands  of  the  children 
of  Israel.' 

^  Judg.  I :  I  ff. 


22  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

There  are  two  or  three  passages  that  should  be 
noted  as  bearing  on  the  ethics  of  the  family  in  primitive 
times.  The  first  is  the  account  of  the  creation  of  woman, 
especially  2:24,  which,  at  first  sight,  might  be  inter- 
preted as  teaching  monogamy  and  the  equality,  at 
least,  of  the  wife  with  her  husband.  This  view,  how- 
ever, can  hardly  be  maintained.  That  monogamy  is 
not  taught  appears  from  the  fact  that  the  author  does 
not  show  any  sign  of  disapproval  of  Lemech  for  taking 
two  wives,  as  he  probably  would  have  done,  had  he 
wished  to  prevent  his  readers  from  following  the  patri- 
arch's example.  As  for  the  equality  of  woman,  that 
would  be  inconsistent  with  the  fact  that  he  represents 
her  as  an  afterthought  of  the  Creator.  The  story  of 
the  sons  of  God  and  the  daughters  of  men  in  6 :  i  f . 
and  4,  if  it  originally  had  its  present  significance,  would 
have  to  be  considered  in  this  connection.  It  is  evident, 
however,  that  the  author  of  it  had  nothing  to  say  with 
reference  to  the  ethical  character  of  the  unions  formed 
between  the  two  classes,  simply  taking  for  granted,  as 
most  men  did  in  ancient  times,  that  such  marriages  had 
actually  taken  place  and  finding  in  them  an  explanation 
of  the  origin  of  the  giants  whose  exploits  were  also 
universally  accepted  as  historical  facts. 

The  Judean  narrative,  as  already  noted,  traces  the 
organization  of  society  to  the  time  of  Enoch,  the  builder 
of  the  first  city.  The  social  tendency  in  this  primitive 
period,  according  to  11 :  i  ff.,  was  so  strong  that  Yahweh 
was  obliged  to  intervene  and  confuse  the  speech  of 
mankind  to  bring  about  their  dispersion  to  the  four 
quarters  of  the  earth.  There  is  only  one  passage  in 
which  reference  is  made  to  any  law  or  custom  by  which 


THE  LEGENDARY  PERIOD  23 

men  were  then  governed  in  their  relations  with  one 
another,  namely,  4:3  f.,  where  Lemech,  in  the  first 
biblical  lyric,  celebrates  his  ability  to  avenge  himself 
upon  his  enemies.  His  savage  boast  implies  a  crude 
sense  of  justice  and  the  recognition  of  the  law  of  retalia- 
tion, and  the  author  seems  not  to  have  required  or 
expected  anything  better  of  the  period  that  he  was 
describing.  He  does  not  object  even  to  the  ratio  of 
seventy  and  seven  to  one,  if  the  avenger  is  strong 
enough  to  exact  it. 

One  point  more  deserves  attention.  It  is  matter  of 
common  knowledge  among  students  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment that  the  ideas  of  the  early  Hebrews  on  the  subject 
of  truth  and  falsehood  were  rather  embryonic.  This 
fact  is  recognized  by  translators  and  commentators, 
but  some  of  them,  in  their  desire  to  make  it  appear, 
do  scant  justice  to  the  subtlety  of  either  the  serpent  or 
the  Judean  narrator.  Thus  the  revisers  of  the  English 
Version  have  put  into  the  mouth  of  the  serpent  the 
half -assertive  question,  "Yea,  hath  God  said.  Ye  shall 
not  eat  of  any  tree  of  the  garden?"  This,  however, 
is  certainly  not  the  thought  that  the  author  intended  to 
express.  What  God  said  was  that  man  might  eat  of 
all  the  trees  but  one.  To  make  the  serpent  flatly 
contradict  him  at  the  outset  would  have  been  a  very 
clumsy  expedient.  It  should  be  made  to  say,  as  the 
Hebrew  is  most  naturally  translated,  not  "any  tree," 
but  "all  the  trees,"  "of  the  garden";  this  change  of 
emphasis  from  the  positive  to  the  negative  in  the 
divine  utterance  being  a  device  to  mislead  without 
lying  that  was  worthy  of  "the  most  subtil  of  all  the 
beasts  of  the  field  which  Yahweh  had  made."    The 


24  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

same  subtlety  manifests  itself  in  the  serpent's  reply  to 
the  explanation  attempted  by  the  woman.  The  first 
clause  is  translated,  *'Ye  shall  not  surely  die,"  as  if  it 
were  a  direct  and  absolute  contradiction  of  the  warning 
of  2:17.  Here  the  translators  have  erred  in  that  they 
have  given  to  an  ambiguous  expression  the  same  sense 
that  it  has  in  a  different  connection.  The  ambiguity 
is  due  to  the  use  of  a  verbal  construction,^  denoting 
emphasis,  for  which  there  is  no  uniform  rendering. 
Thus,  in  Gen.  43:7,  where  it  occurs  twice,  the  transla- 
tion in  the  first  instance  is  "asked  straitly,"  and  in  the 
second,  "could  we  in  any  wise  know  ?"  It  is  clear  from 
these  examples  that  the  words  rendered  "Thou  shalt 
surely  die"  might  also  mean  "Thou  shalt  utterly  die," 
"Thou  shall  immediately  die,"  or  anything  else  that 
might  be  expressed  by  the  verb  "die"  with  an  appro- 
priate modifier.  Now,  it  is  evident  from  the  sequel 
that  in  2:17  "die"  means  "become  subject  to  death," 
and  that,  therefore,  the  phrase  "in  the  day  that"  must 
not  be  taken  too  Hterally.  This  being  the  case,  a  better 
rendering  for  the  whole  clause  would  be,  "If  ever  thou 
eat  thereof,  thou  shalt  die,"  which  is  sufficiently  ambigu- 
ous without  being  positively  misleading.  The  serpent, 
in  its  reply  to  the  woman,  takes  advantage  of  the  ambi- 
guity of  the  construction  employed  to  contradict  what 
Yahweh  did  not  assert,  namely,  that  death  would  be 
the  immediate  effect  of  partaking  of  the  fruit  of  the 
forbidden  tree,  cunningly  calculating  that  she  would 
not  detect  the  fallacy.  These  may  seem  trivial  dis- 
tinctions, but  they  must  not  be  overlooked,  for  they 
have  important  bearings.  The  same  is  true,  from  the 
'  The  finite  verb  preceded  by  the  so-called  infinitive  absolute. 


THE  LEGENDARY  PERIOD  2$ 

literary  standpoint,  of  the  interpretation  of  vs.  lo 
according  to  which  "the  man  hopes  to  escape  complete 
exposure  by  acknowledging  part  of  the  truth"  (Skinner), 
and  the  natural  one,  which  is,  that  the  man  had  been 
so  occupied  with  the  new  faculty  that  he  had  not  had 
time  to  reflect  on  the  means  by  which  he  had  acquired  it. 
The  author  of  the  inimitable  story  cannot  have  failed 
to  see  that  an  artless  reply  was  needed  to  give  to  this 
passage  the  greatest  dramatic  interest. 

The  Judean  narrative  was  a  work  of  the  ninth 
century  B.C.  In  the  eighth  century  the  section  that 
has  just  been  examined  was  enlarged  by  the  addition 
of  the  story  of  Cain  and  Abel  and  the  Yahwistic  account 
of  the  Deluge.  Thus,  as  will  appear,  a  romance  touched 
with  genius  was  transformed  into  a  sermon  almost  as 
openly  didactic  as  a  chapter  from  the  Book  of  Amos. 
Still  later,  when  the  Priestly  document  was  added  to  the 
previous  compilation,  the  old  story  was  again  expanded, 
and  thenceforth,  in  its  framework  of  Jewish  theology, 
could  still  less  justly  be  regarded  as  a  trustworthy 
record  of  the  earliest  period  in  human  history. 


CHAPTER  III 

THE  PATRIARCHAL  PERIOD 

The  second  period  in  the  history  of  the  Hebrews,  as 
they  related  it,  extends  from  the  general  dispersion  to 
the  descent  of  Jacob  and  his  family  into  Egypt.  In 
this,  as  in  the  preceding  period,  it  is  the  Judean  narra- 
tive to  which  one  must  go  for  the  most  ancient  and 
valuable  data  concerning  it.  This  remarkable  work  is 
the  source  from  which  the  legend  with  reference  to  the 
tower  of  BabeP  was  taken.  The  next  extract  from 
it  is  an  account  of  Terah  and  his  family.^  It  tells  how 
Abram,  a  son  of  Terah,  at  the  command  of  Yahweh, 
removed  from  Haran  to  Canaan,  taking  Lot  with  him,^ 
and  how,  after  they  had  separated,"*  Yahweh  appeared 
to  him  and  promised  him  a  numerous  and  prosperous 
posterity,  with  Canaan  for  their  inheritance. ^  Next, 
if  it  is  genuine,  should  come  the  story  of  Abram's  visit 
to  Egypt,^  followed  by  that  of  Hagar's  flight^  and  his 
marriage  with  Keturah.^  The  visit  of  the  angels  to 
Mamre^  belongs  to  this  narrative,  also  most  of  the 

^Gen.  11:1-9. 

»  Gen.  II :  28  f.,  except  "in  Ur  of  the  Chaldees." 

3  Gen.  i2:i-4a,  5b-8. 

4  Gen.  13:2,  s,  6b&-7a,  8-1  la  (except  "like  the  land  of  Egypt," 
in  vs.  10),  I2b6-i3,  18. 

s  Gen.  15:3  f.,  6-11  (except  "of  Ur  of  the  Chaldees,"  in  vs.  7),  17  f. 

*  Gen.  12:10-20,  except  "and  she-asses  and  camels,"  in  vs.  16. 

'Gen.  i6:ib-2,  4-8,  11-14. 

8  Gen.  25 :  i-3a,  4,  and  i8a,  in  their  original  form. 

'Gen.  18:1-15. 

96 


THE  PATRIARCHAL  PERIOD  27 

account  of  the  destruction  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah' 
and  the  origin  of  the  peoples  of  Moab  and  Ammon.^ 

The  Ufe  of  Isaac  is  less  fully  and  clearly  portrayed; 
but  special  attention  is  given  to  his  birth,^  his  marriage 
with  Rebekah/  his  relations  with  Abimelech  of  Gerar,^ 
the  birth  of  his  sons,^  and  the  transfer  of  the  birthright 
from  Esau  to  Jacob.'' 

The  rest  of  the  Judean  narrative,  so  far  as  it  is 
contained  in  Genesis,  with  the  exception  of  the  list  of 
the  Kings  of  Edom  in  36:32-39,  is  devoted  to  Jacob 
and  his  family.  It  tells  how  Jacob,  fleeing  to  the 
East  to  escape  his  angry  brother,  had  a  vision  at  Bethel* 
and,  on  his  arrival  near  Haran  met  Rachel,'  and  served 
Laban  twenty  years  for  his  two  daughters  and  an  interest 
in  his  flocks,"  but  finally  became  dissatisfied  and  secretly 

»Gen.  18:16,  2o-22a,  33b;  19:1-25  (except  "two  angels,"  for 
"men,"  in  vs.  i;  "even  the  men  of  Sodom,"  in  vs.  4;  "even  Lot,"  in 
vs.  9;  "son  in  law  and,"  and  "them"  in  vs.  6;  "them,"  for  "him," 
and  "he,"  for  "they,"  in  vs.  17),  27a,  28. 

^  Gen.  19:30-38.  3  Gen.  21:1a,  2a,  6b-7. 

*Gen.  22:2oa6-24;  24  (except  "brethren,"  for  "brother,"  in  24:27, 
and  "Bethuel,"  in  vs.  50;  "days  at  least  ten,"  for  "a  month  of  days," 
in  vs.  55;  "mother  Sarah's,"  in  vs.  67);   25: 11. 

sGen.  26:iaa,  b,  2  ("And  ....  said"),  3a,  6-11;  21:34  (except 
"Abraham"  for  "Isaac");   26:12-14,  16  f.,  19-33. 

^  Gen.  25:2i-26a,  except  "red,"  in  vs.  25. 

7  Gen.  25:27-34;  27:1  ("And  ....  son"),  2-10  (except  "and 
to  bring  it,"  for  "for  his  father,"  in  vs.  5),  14  f.,  17,  i8b6-20,  24-3oaa, 
3ob-32,  35-38aa,  38b,  4i-44a  (except  "in  his  heart,"  in  vs.  41),  45. 

*  Gen.  28:10,  13-16,  19.  9  Gen.  29:2-14. 

"  Gen.  29: 26,  31-35  (except  "was  his  name  called,"  for  "she  called 
his  name");  3o:3b6-5,  7,  9-16,  2oa&,  21,  22b6-23a,  24,  25,  27,  29-43 
(except  "and  keep  it,"  in  vs.  31,  "I  will,"  and  "evQfy  speckled  .... 
one,  and,"  in  vs.  32,  "ringstreaked,"  in  vs.  35,  "himself,"  for  "them," 
in  vs.  36,  "in  the  watering  troughs  where  the  flocks  came  to  drink," 
in  vs.  38,  "and  the  flocks  conceived"  and  "ringstreaked,"  in  vs.  39, 
"and  set  ...  .  ringstreaked,"  in  vs.  40). 


28  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

took  his  departure  for  Canaan;'  also  how,  as  he  was  near- 
ing  that  country,  he  contrived  to  placate  his  brother.^ 
Next  should  come  the  disappearance  of  Joseph,^  then, 
in  succession,  the  seizure  of  Dinah,^  Jacob's  return  to 
the  SouthjS  and  the  story  of  Judah  and  Tamar.^ 

From  this  point  onward  Joseph  is  the  dominant 
figure.  The  author  tells  how  he  served  as  a  slave  in 
Egypt,7  was  unjustly  imprisoned,^  but  was  released  to 
interpret  the  dreams  of  the  king,^  and  become  his 
prime  minister;"  next  how  he  saved  his  family  from 

^Gen.  31:1,  3,  19a,  2i-23a,  25  (except  "with  his  brethren"), 
27,  31  (except  "Because  I  was  afraid"),  38-40,  43  f.  (except  "let  it  be 
for,"  for  "let  there  be,"  in  vs.  44),  46  (except  "Jacob,"  for  "Laban"), 
48,  5oaa,  Si-53a  (except  "and  behold  the  pillar,"  in  51,  "and  the  pillar 
be  witness,"  and  "and  this  pillar,"  in  vs.  52,  "the  God  of  their  father," 
in  S3a). 

»Gen.  32:3  (except  "the  field  of  Edom"),  4-7a,  i3b-22a,  a^a-b, 
24-29  (except  "and  with  men,"  in  vs.  28),  31;  33:1-3,  4  (in  part), 
6-10,  12-17. 

3  Gen.  37:3aa,  3b-4,  i2-i3a,  I4b-i8  (except  "Hebron,"  for  "Suc- 
coth,"  in  14a),  21  (except  "Reuben,"  for  "Judah"),  23,  25-27,  28a6-b, 
32  ("and  they  sent  ....  colors"),  33b,  35. 

4  Gen.  34:2b-3a,  3b&,  5,  7,  ii-i3a  (except  "and  gift,"  in  vs.  12, 
"and  Hamor  his  father,"  in  13a),  14  (except  "unto  them"),  19,  25 
("that  two  ....  his  sword"),  26  (except  "Hamor  and"  and  "his 
son"),  29b-3i. 

sGen.  3s:i6-22a  (except  "for  she  died,"  in  vs.  18,  "the  same  is 
Bethlehem,"  in  vs.  19). 

^  Gen.,  chap.  38  (except  "he,"  for  "she,"  in  vs.  3,  and  "his  name 
was  called,"  for  "she  called  his  name,"  in  vss.  29  and  30). 

7  Gen.  39:1  (except  "Potiphar  ....  guard"),  2  f.,  4  (except 
"and  he  ministered  to  him"),  5,  6a&-b,  7a&-2oaa  (except  "by  her  to 
be,"  in  vs.  10),  20b. 

*Gen.  39:21-23;  4o:ia&-b,  3  ("into  ....  bound"),  sb,  15b. 

9  Gen.  41:9b,  I4a6,  31,  34,  35  (except  "and  lay  up  ...  .  food"). 

"  Gen.  41:41,  43b-44,  46b-48,  S3-S4a,  55- 


THE  PATRIARCHAL  PERIOD  29 

starvation,^  bringing  them  to  Egypt;*  and  finally  how, 
when  Jacob,  having  made  provision  for  his  burial,^ 
adopted  the  sons  of  Joseph,^  and  blessed  his  own  sons,^ 
died,  Joseph  buried  him^  and  returned  to  Egypt  to 
live  and  die  in  great  honor.^ 

There  can  be  little  doubt  that  the  first  section  of 
the  Judean  narrative  is  largely  legendary.  So,  also, 
it  must  be  admitted,  is  the  story  of  the  tower  of  Babel. 
The  same  has  been,  and  is,  asserted  of  those  concerning 
the  patriarchs,^  but  there  were  Abrams  in  the  days  of 

^  Gen.  42:1a,  2,  4-7  (except  "and  spake  roughly  with  them,"  in 
vs.  7),  iia,  27-28ba,  38;  43:1-11,  i2b-23,  is-23a,  24-34;  44:1a,  2-34 
(except  "and  his  corn  money,"  in  vs.  2,  "I"  and  "my,"  for  "we"  and 
"our,"  in  vs.  30);  45:1,  4,  5  ("And  now  be  not  grieved" — "that 
ye  sold  me  hither"),  9-1 1,  13  f. 

» Gen.  45:i9-2iaa,  27a,  28;  46:1a,  28-34  (except  "they,"  for 
"he,"  in  vs.  28,  "presented  himself  to,"  for  "saw,"  in  vs.  29,  "and  to 
his  father's  house,"  in  vs.  31,  "for  ....  cattle,"  in  vs.  32);  47:1-4 
(except  "And  ....  Pharaoh,"  in  vs.  4),  6b,  i2-27a  (except  "and  the 
land  of  Canaan,"  in  vss.  13  and  15,  "and  for  food  for  the  little  ones," 
in  vs.  24,  "in  the  land  of  Egypt,"  in  vs.  27a). 

3  Gen.  47:29-31. 

4  Gen.  48:2b,  9b,  i3-i4ba,  17-20  (except  "In  thee  shall  Israel 
bless,"  for  "In  you  shall  Israel  bless  themselves"  in  vs.  20). 

5  Gen.  49:  ib-9,  11-17  (except  "upon  Zidon,"  for  "as  far  as  Zidon," 
in  vs.  13),  19-28  (except  "out  of,"  in  vs.  20,  "his  bow  abode  in  strength," 
for  "their  bows  by  might  were  broken,"  "the  arms  of  his  hands  were 
made  strong,"  for  "the  sinews  of  their  hands  were  benumbed,"  and 
"from  thence  is  the  shepherd,  the  stone  of  Israel,"  for  "by  the  name  of 
the  shepherd  of  his  father  Israel,"  in  vs.  24,  "by  the  Almighty,"  for 
"  God  Almighty"  and  "  that  coucheth,"  in  vs.  25,  " my  progenitors  .... 
bound,"  for  "the  enduring  mountains,  the  treasures,"  in  vs.  26). 

•5  Gen.  49:33  ("he  gathered  ....  bed");  50:1-11  (except  "which 
is  beyond  Jordan,"  in  vss.  10  and  11). 

7  Gen.  50: 14a,  18,  21  f. 

8  H.  P.  Smith,  Old  Testament  History,  48,  50  f.;  J.  P.  Peters,  Early 
Hebrew  Story,  46,  94,  128. 


30  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

the  first  Babylonian  dynasty,  and  the  conditions  were 
such  as  to  tempt,  or,  finally,  to  drive  them  and  others 
to  Canaan.  Hebrew  tradition  says  that  one  of  the 
name  actually  migrated  in  this  direction;  that  he 
traversed  the  western  country  from  north  to  south; 
that  he  pitched  his  tents  at  or  near  Beersheba;  and 
that  his  descendants,  to  at  least  the  third  generation, 
fed  their  flocks  in  the  same  region.  It  says  other  things 
about  them,  some  of  which  are  doubtless  legendary,  but 
these  seem  credible,  especially  in  view  of  the  fact  that, 
even  after  the  schism  between  the  northern  and  the 
southern  tribes,  the  former  still  made  pilgrimages  to 
the  shrine  at  Beersheba.'  If,  however,  it  could  be 
shown  that  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob  were  unreal 
characters,  such  an  admission  would  not  render  the 
Judean  account  of  them  valueless;  for  the  stories  it 
contains  are  evidently  much  older  than  the  work  in 
which  they  have  been  preserved,  and  may  supply 
valuable  data  on  ethical  conditions  in  that  early  period.^ 
Indeed,  one  may  be  able  to  infer  something  with  reference 
to  the  still  earHer  period  to  which  the  patriarchs  are 
assigned. 

What,  now,  is  the  ethical  teaching  of  the  Judean 
narrative  concerning  the  patriarchs?  It  need  not  be 
sought  on  the  surface;  for,  as  has  been  noted,  the  author 
in  this  narrative  was  not  a  preacher,  but  a  raconteur, 
who  saw  in  these  stories  illustrations  of  human  nature, 

^  Amos  5:5;  8:14. 

*  Gressmann  {Zeitschrift  fUr  die  alUestamentliche  Wissenschaft,  19 10, 
34),  who  holds  the  legendary  view,  says,  "When  one  carefully  weighs 
all  the  circumstances  that  bear  on  the  subject,  one  may  regard  the  period 
from  1300  to  1 100  B.C.  as  that  of  the  origin  of  the  great  mass  of  the 
separate  stories  in  Genesis." 


THE  PATRIARCHAL  PERIOD  31 

and,  if  he  sometimes  took  liberties  with  them,  did  so 
only  to  bring  out  more  clearly  their  original  meaning. 
There  are  two  other  points  that  must  also  be  kept  in 
mind.  The  first  is  that  the  patriarchs  all  belong  to  one 
walk  of  life,  for,  although  Joseph  becomes  vizier  to  the 
king  of  Egypt,  he  never  forgets  his  origin  or  denies  his 
pastoral  father  and  brothers.  These  ancestors  were 
migrant  shepherds,  that  is,  they  followed  a  vocation 
that  prevented  them  from  living  in  houses,  like  some 
of  the  other  inhabitants  of  Palestine,  but,  at  the  same 
time,  prevented  them  from  roaming  at  will,  like  the 
bedawin  of  the  desert.  They  will  therefore  have  the 
virtues  and  defects  of  the  pastoral  condition,  except — 
and  this  is  the  second  consideration — as  they  may  have 
been  influenced  by  their  relations  with  the  Egyptians, 
the  Babylonians,  and  the  Canaanites,  all  of  whom, 
long  before  the  period  in  which  the  patriarchs  are 
supposed  to  have  lived,  had  reached  a  high  degree  of 
civilization.  The  attractions  of  Canaan  are  thus 
described  in  the  Story  of  Sanehat: 

It  was  a  goodly  land;  as  was  its  name. 

The  fig  and  the  vine  were  there; 

Wine  was  more  plentiful  than  water. 

It  was  rich  in  honey  and  olive  trees; 

All  its  trees  bore  fruit. 

There  was  barley  there,  and  wheat; 

There  was  no  end  to  its  cattle.^ 

It  had  also  made  progress  in  the  arts,  as  appears  from 
the  completeness  with  which  its  people,  according  to 
Sanehat,  were  equipped  for  war. 

This  is  the  background  against  which  the  patriarchs, 
if  they  belong  to  the  period  to  which  they  have  been 

^  Records  of  the  Past'',  VI,  131  ff. 


32  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

assigned,  must  be  seen  and  studied.  It  is  now  time  to 
inquire  how  these  ancients,  each  of  whom  is  in  a  sense 
a  hero  in  the  stories  told  of  him,  appear  in  this  environ- 
ment. 

It  is  in  order  first  to  consider  their  personal 
characters.  The  vocation  of  the  shepherd  requires 
that  he  be  simple,  or  even  abstemious,  in  his  habits. 
He  naturally  prides  himself  on  his  abiHty  to  forego 
the  luxuries  that  the  husbandman  enjoys.  There  is 
good  evidence  that  the  Hebrews  made  a  virtue  of 
this  necessity.  In  later  times,  when  they  had  mostly 
become  an  agricultural  people,  there  were  always 
certain  of  them  who  denied  themselves  the  use  of 
wine,  sometimes  for  life.  They  were  called  nazirites, 
and  generally  accorded  a  large  measure  of  respect  by 
their  countrymen.'  The  case  of  the  Rechabites  may 
also  be  cited.  They  were  a  clan  affiliated  with  the 
Hebrews  who  not  only  eschewed  wine,  but  refused 
to  live  in  houses  or  till  the  land  on  which  they 
pastured  their  flocks  and  herds.*  There  are  indications 
that  the  patriarchs  were  originally  represented  as 
genuine  nomads;  for,  according  to  Gen.  i8:8,  when 
the  angels  visited  Abraham  at  Mamre,  he  gave  them 
only  milk  to  drink,  and  it  is  probable  that  in  27:25 
the  wine  which  Jacob  serves  his  father  was  originally 
wanting.  Perhaps,  however,  the  author  here,  as  in 
26:12,  where  Isaac  sows  and  reaps,  intended  to  convey 
the  impression  that  this  patriarch  was  not  a  strict 
nomad.  See  also  the  case  of  Lot.^  Not  that  he  regarded 
the  use  of  wine  by  other  classes  blamable,  for,  it  will  be 

^Judg.  13:55.;  Num.  6:13  ff.;  cf.  Amos  2:11. 
'Jer.  3S:6f.  »  Gen.  19:32  flf. 


THE  PATRIARCHAL  PERIOD  33 

remembered,  it  is  he  who  reckons  Noah  among  the 
benefactors  of  the  race,'  and  in  27:28  and  49:iif. 
mentions  wine  among  the  blessings  that  Isaac  and 
Jacob  promise  their  descendants. 

The  patriarchs  are  represented  as  chaste  and  con- 
tinent, as  compared  with  their  neighbors.  There  is 
only  one  of  them,  Judah,  who  is  accused  of  unnatural 
lust,^  and  he  is  by  no  means  a  shameless  libertine. 
See  especially  vs.  23.  The  story  of  the  destruction 
of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah^  shows  how  the  early  Hebrews 
felt  on  the  subject.  They  would  not  allow  adultery. 
The  Judean  narrator  pictures,  not  only  Joseph,"*  but  even 
Abimelech,^  as  horrified  at  such  a  suggestion.  There 
are  cases,  however,  in  which  they  condoned  fornication, 
and  even  what  was  later  regarded  as  incest.  Those 
of  the  daughters  of  Lot  and  the  Canaanitess  Tamar 
are  two  of  them;  a  third  is  that  of  Dinah.^  In  neither 
of  them  are  the  persons  involved  condemned  as  modern 
standards  require.  In  the  last  Jacob  actually  reproaches 
Levi  and  Simeon  for  avenging  their  sister.''  The 
explanation  is  found  in  the  position  of  woman  in  early 
times  throughout  the  Orient.  The  married  woman  was 
the  property  of  her  husband,  against  whom  the  viola- 
tion of  her  virtue  was  an  irreparable  injury.  The 
unmarried  woman  was  the  property  of  her  father, 
property,  however,  which  had  a  certain  more  or  less 
definite  value  in  money,  and  could  be  purchased  at 
that  price.    When,  therefore,  Shechem  offered  to  make 

^  Gen.  5:29.  s  Gen.  26:10. 

2  Gen.  38:135.  «  Gen.  34 :  i  ff . 

3Gen.  iQ:iff.  7  Gen.  34:30. 
4  Gen.  39:7  ff. 


34         THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

Dinah  his  wife,  and  pay  any  required  sum  for  her,  he 
naturally  felt  that  he  had  offered  her  relatives  abundant 
reparation.  In  later  times  such  a  settlement,  though 
not  mandatory,  was  sanctioned  by  Hebrew  law/  The 
other  two  cases  come  under  the  same  general  head. 
When  one  puts  a  price  upon  a  thing,  one  advertises 
one's  willingness  to  part  with  it,  especially  if  the  con- 
sideration offered  is  something  that  is  recognized  as 
more  desirable.  Now,  Lot's  daughters  had  a  certain 
value  to  him,  but  he  placed  so  much  higher  his  reputa- 
tion as  a  host,  that,  when  his  house  was  beset  by  a  mob 
demanding  that  his  guests  be  deHvered  to  them,  he 
offered  to  sacrifice  both  of  his  daughters  to  save  the 
strangers  from  abuse.^  What  wonder,  then,  that  these 
same  women,  when  their  family  was  threatened  with 
extinction,  parted  with  their  own  virtue  in  the  emer- 
gency, or  that  Tamar,  when  denied  a  lawful  husband, 
took  the  same  method  to  secure  what  she,  and  everyone 
else  in  her  day,  esteemed  a  higher  good?  They  were 
all  simply  fulfilling  their  duty  and  destiny,  from  the 
standpoint  of  their  times,  and  they  were  honored  for 
so  doing  in  spite  of  the  conventions.^ 

The  faith  of  Abraham  is  proverbial.  Now  faith,  of 
course,  is  a  rehgious  sentiment;  but  it  often  induces 
admirable  moral  qualities,  while  the  lack  of  it  permits 
the  development  of  their  opposites.  Thus,  the  faith 
of  Abraham  rendered  him  patient,  steadfast,  and 
fearless  to  a  degree  in  which  these  qualities  are  seldom 

^Exod.  22:16.  'Cjen.  19:7!. 

5  Gen.  38:26.  The  story  of  Lot's  daughters,  whatever  may  have 
been  the  interpretation  afterward  given  to  it,  was  certainly  not  originally 
intended  to  cast  reproach  upon  Moab  and  Ammon,  the  two  peoples 
whose  descent  is  traced  from  them. 


THE  PATRIARCHAL  PERIOD  35 

exemplified.  In  Gen.  12:10  he  is  reported  to  have 
lost  both  hisiaith  and  his  courajge,  and,  in  his  confusion, 
to  have  not  only  lied,  but  risked  his  wife's  virtue  to 
protect  himself.  There  is  some  doubt  whether  this 
passage  originally  belonged  to  the  Judean  narrative, 
but  that,  for  the  present,  is  of  little  consequence,  since 
the  Yahwist  tells  the  same  story,  in  26:6  ff.,  of  Isaac 
and  Rebekah.  Nor  is  the  falsehood  or  the  exposure 
of  the  woman  in  either  case  the  thing  of  importance. 
It  is  by  no  means  strange  that  a  man  or  woman  in  a 
moment  of  weakness  should  give  way  to  selfishness  and 
resort  to  deception.  Many  have  done  so  for  once 
without  losing  the  respect  and  confidence  of  their 
fellows.  The  significant  thing  is,  that,  although  in 
both  cases  the  falsehood  is  discovered,  in  neither  is  it 
in  itself  treated  as  a  serious  matter  by  the  parties  con- 
cerned. In  other  words,  these  stories  betray  the  admira- 
tion for  cunning  as  compared  with  courage,  which  is 
one  of  the  noticeable  features  of  the  oriental  character. 
There  are  other  examples  in  plenty.  Indeed,  the 
Judean  account  of  Jacob  is  largely  a  series  of  tricks 
by  which  the  persons  introduced,  evidently  to  the 
author's  amusement,  seek  to  overreach  one  another. 
Thus  it  was  by  such  a  trick  that  Rebekah  obtained 
the  blessing  of  the  firstborn  for  Jacob  ;^  that  Laban 
secured  the  services  of  Jacob  for  fourteen  years  ;^  that 
Jacob  transferred  the  best  of  Laban's  cattle  to  his  own 
possession;^  and  that  the  same  rid  himself  of  his  brother 
Esau."*  See,  also,  the  stories,  how  Tamar  outwitted 
her    father-in-law,^    and    how    Joseph    entrapped    his 

^  Gen.  27:15,  27.  3  Gen.  30:37  fif.  s  Gen.  38:75. 

Gen.  29 :  26.  ^  Gen.  33 :  14  ff . 


36  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

brothers/  In  some  of  these  cases  the  end  sought  was 
worthy,  but  in  others  both  the  end  and  the  means  used 
to  obtain  it  were  ethically  reprehensible. 

In  the  preceding  discussion  it  has  been  impossible 
to  keep  personal  entirely  distinct  from  domestic  ethics. 
The  second  topic  must  now  be  more  particularly 
considered. 

In  this  period  the  family  is  especially  prominent. 
Indeed,  the  development  of  the  family  is  represented 
as  the  ideal  to  the  attainment  of  which  every  other 
object  must  be  subordinated.  The  sacrifices  required 
of  the  individual  in  its  interest  were  sometimes,  from 
the  modern  standpoint,  cruel  and  revolting.  Thus, 
because  Sarah  was  denied  offspring,  she  was  obliged 
to  submit  to  the  presence  of  a  rival  in  the  person  of 
Hagar  in  her  household,^  and  Rachel  long  suffered 
almost  beyond  endurance  from  inward  as  well  as  out- 
ward reproaches  because  she  could  not  fulfil  the  func- 
tion of  a  desirable  wife.^  The  cases  of  the  daughters 
of  Lot  and  the  Canaanitess  Tamar  have  already  been 
noted,  and  their  devotion  in  that  they  sacrificed  their 
virtue  and  involved  a  father  and  a  father-in-law  in 
incest,  that  the  families  which  they  represented  might 
not  be  extinguished. 

The  patriarchs,  as  they  appear  in  the  oldest  narra- 
tive, show  no  lack  of  affection  for  their  wives  or  children, 
but  they  have  the  unconscious  defects  of  oriental  parents, 
who  are  often  unwisely  indulgent,  especially  toward 
their  sons,  and,  when  there  are  more  wives  than  one, 
blindly  partial  toward  the  child,  or  children,  of  the 
favorite.    Thus,  Isaac  indulged  the  careless  Esau  and 

^  Gen.  44:1.  ^  Gen.  16:  iff.  ^  Gen.  30:14  f. 


THE  PATRIARCHAL  PERIOD  37 

ignored  the  plodding  Jacob  ;^  while  Jacob,  in  his  turn, 
alienated  his  other  sons  and  brought  upon  himself  a 
bitter  bereavement  by  his  foolish  fondness  for  Joseph.^ 

The  inferior  position  of  woman  has  already  been 
noted.  The  earliest  Hebrew  traditions  represent  her 
as  the  property  of  her  father  or  her  husband,  and  no 
protest  is  made  against  a  relation  so  unnatural  and 
degrading.  The  bride  was  actually  sold  to  the  family 
into  which  she  married.  This  fact  is  not  prominent 
in  the  story  of  Rebekah's  espousal,^  but  it  is  easily 
inferred  here  as  well  as  in  the  cases  of  Rachel  and  Leah,'' 
and  it  is  very  clearly  presented  in  the  negotiations 
between  Jacob  and  Shechem  concerning  Dinah.^  Of 
course,  as  has  already  been  observed,  since  daughters 
had  their  price,  the  father  might  accept  a  compensation 
for  injury  done  one,^  or  even  sacrifice  her,  as  Lot  was 
willing  to  do,7  for  the  sake  of  something  that  seemed  to 
him  at  the  time  of  greater  value  or  importance. 

The  treatment  of  woman  as  a  chattel  explains  the 
practice  of  polygamy  among  the  early  Hebrews.  A 
man  of  strong  passions  would  naturally,  if  permitted 
by  public  opinion,  have  as  many  wives  as  he  could 
afford,  while  the  man  of  only  average  means,  if  his 
first  choice  for  any  reason  proved  unsatisfactory,  would 
be  tempted  to  sacrifice  her  comfort  or  happiness  that 
he  might  attain  his  object  in  marriage,  especially  if  it 
were  offspring.  In  early  times  Hebrew  opinion  sanc- 
tioned, not  only  polygamy,  and  that,  too,  when  the 
women  were  sisters,  as  in  the  case  of  Rachel  and  Leah,^ 

^  Gen.  25 :  28.  -•  Gen.  37 : 38.  ?  Gen.  19 : 8. 

'Gen.  37:3!.  s  Gen.  34:11  f.  *  Gen.  29:31  iff. 

3  Gen.  24:53.  ^Ibid. 


38  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

but  concubinage,  a  relation  in  which  the  woman  was  a 
slave  wholly  in  the  power  of  her  owner.  She  might 
belong  to  the  husband.  There  are  no  cases  of  this- 
kind  in  the  second  section  of  the  Judean  narrative, 
but  there  are  those  in  which  she  belongs  to  the  wife 
and  the  wife  gives  her  voluntarily  to  the  husband. 
Thus,  Sarah  gives  her  maid  Hagar  to  Abraham,^  and 
Rachel  and  Leah  give  Bilhah  and  Zilpah  to  Jacob ."^ 
In  such  cases,  according  to  the  Code  of  Hammurabi,^ 
the  husband  was  forbidden  to  take  a  second  concubine, 
but  there  is  no  mention  of  such  a  restriction  among  the 
Hebrews.* 

The  concubines  of  which  one  reads  in  the  earhest 
narrative  were  slaves,  but  they  were  not  the  only  class 
of  bondservants  among  the  Hebrews.  In  the  ancient 
world  slavery  was  a  universal  institution,  and  the 
patriarchs  bought  and  sold  their  fellow-men  unrebuked. 
Abraham  had  many  slaves  in  his  family  besides  Hagar,^ 
one  of  them  being  the  wise  and  faithful  steward  whom 
he  sent  to  Mesopotamia  to  arrange  the  marriage  between 
Isaac  and  Rebekah.^  Isaac,  also,  held  men  in  bondage,^ 
and,  as  for  Joseph,  whose  foresight  prevented  a  wide- 
spread famine,  according  to  the  correct  reading  in  Gen. 
47:21  he  made  the  Eg)^tians  pay  for  their  Hves  with 
their  freedom,  for  ''he  caused  them  to  serve  as  slaves 
from  one  end  of  the  border  of  Egypt  to  the  other." 

^  Gen.  16:2.  'Gen.  30:4,  9.         ^  §  i44- 

4  When  Sarah  dealt  severely  with  Hagar,  as  narrated  in  Gen. 
16:6,  she  followed  exactly  a  provision  of  the  Code  of  Hammurabi 
(§  146)  according  to  which,  if  a  maid  who  has  borne  children  makes 
herself  the  equal  of  her  mistress,  the  mistress  "may  put  a  mark  upon 
her  and  count  her  among  the  maidservants." 

s  Gen.  24:35.  '  Gen.  24:2.  ^  Gen.  26:19,  25,  32. 


THE  PATRIARCHAL  PERIOD  39 

In  this  connection  it  is  proper  to  inquire  what  the 
early  Hebrews,  according  to  the  Judean  narrative, 
thought  about  the  duties  of  children  toward  their 
parents  and  toward  one  another.  It  is  easy  to  see  that, 
in  view  of  the  power  lodged  in  the  father,  they  would 
naturally  require  reverence  for  him  and  obedience  to 
his  conunands.  The  Semites  all  early  formulated  these 
requirements  and  severely  punished  any  serious  neglect 
of  them.  Thus,  the  Code  of  Hammurabi^  prescribed 
that  the  man  who  struck  his  father  should  lose  his 
hands.  The  Hebrews,  also,  from  the  earhest  times 
doubtless  had  a  severe  penalty  for  such  an  offense, 
which,  however,  would  seldom  have  to  be  inflicted, 
or  even  recalled,  to  secure  proper  respect  and  obedience 
for  worthy  parents.  At  any  rate,  there  are,  in  the 
earliest  traditions  of  this  period,  touching  examples 
of  filial  affection.  One  of  them  is  found  in  the  part 
played  in  the  story  of  Joseph  by  Judah,  who  is  repre- 
sented as  at  last  so  changed  from  his  former  mercenary 
self  that,  when  Joseph  threatened  to  detain  Benjamin 
in  Egypt,  he  offered  to  take  his  brother's  place  rather 
than  witness  the  effect  on  his  father  of  the  loss  of  the 
second  son  of  the  beloved  Rachel.^  The  tender  reverence 
of  Joseph  himself  for  his  father  is  equally  admirable  and 
affecting:  witness  his  message  to  the  old  man,^  the 
reception  he  gave  him  on  his  arrival  in  Eg3^t,'*  the 
provision  he  made  for  his  last  days,^  and  the  piety  with 
which  he  finally  laid  the  patriarch  to  rest  in  his  chosen 
sepulcher.^    Indeed,  of  all  the  noble  quahties  of  this 

*  §  195.  4  Gen.  46:29. 

»  Gen.  44:305.  s  Gen.  47:12. 

3  Gen.  45 : 9  f.  ^  Gen.  50: 7  fiF. 


40  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

remarkable  character,  there  is  none  more  worthy  of 
praise  or  imitation  than  his  devotion  to  his  father. 

The  constitution  of  the  Hebrew  family  was  not 
conducive  to  fraternal  kindness  and  affection.  When 
there  was  but  one  wife,  the  advantage  given  to  the 
firstborn  naturally  made  him  an  object  of  envy  and 
hatred  to  his  brothers.  When  there  were  more  wives 
than  one,  it  was  even  more  difficult  for  the  children  to 
"dwell  together  in  unity."  A  case  of  the  first  kind  is 
that  of  Esau  and  Jacob,  and  one  of  the  second  that  of 
Joseph  and  his  brothers.  A  state  of  discord  was  not, 
however,  regarded  as  normal.  It  is  therefore  with 
evident  approbation  that  tradition  tells  of  the  recon- 
ciliation between  Esau  and  Jacob,  and  Judah's  atone- 
ment for  his  cruelty  to  Joseph  by  his  wilHngness  to  save 
Benjamin  from  slavery.  Here,  however,  as  in  devotion 
to  his  father,  Joseph  is  the  shining  example;  for  he  not 
only  manifests  the  utmost  tenderness  for  Benjamin,^ 
but  treats  his  half-brothers,  all  of  them,  as  if  he  had 
never  known  injury  at  their  hands. ^ 

The  range  of  the  Judean  Genesis  is  so  narrow  that 
there  is  very  little  material  on  which  to  base  an  idea 
of  its  teaching  from  the  social  standpoint,  even  if  Lot 
be  reckoned  outside  the  domestic  zone. 

The  mention  of  Lot  suggests  a  quality  for  which 
some  of  the  patriarchs  were  conspicuous;  namely, 
magnanimity.  It  showed  itself  in  Abraham,  when  his 
servants  became  embroiled  with  Lot's,  and  he  gave  the 
latter  his  choice  before  himself  deciding  which  direction 
he  would  take;^    in  Isaac,  also,  when,  in  spite  of  the 

^  Gen.  43:29;  45:14.  3  Gen.  13:75. 

^Gen.  4s:4-sa;  47:12;  50:21. 


THE  PATRIARCHAL  PERIOD  41 

annoyance  he  had  suffered  from  the  Gerarites,  he  con- 
sented to  make  a  treaty  with  their  king/ 

There  are  more  examples  of  the  oriental  virtue  of 
hospitahty.  The  scene  at  Mamre  in  which  Abraham 
unwittingly  entertains  three  angels^  is  classic.  The 
nature  and  excellence  of  genuine  hospitality  could  not 
be  more  attractively  exempHfied.  Lot,  also,  appears 
at  his  best  as  a  host.  He  had  so  exalted  an  idea  of  his 
responsibility  in  this  relation  that,  as  has  already  been 
pointed  out,  he  was  willing  to  sacrifice  his  daughters 
to  the  passions  of  a  mob  rather  than  permit  his  guests  to 
be  debauched.^ 

There  is  no  hint  that  either  Abraham  or  Lot  ever 
put  any  restrictions  upon  their  hospitality.  They 
themselves  were  sojourners,  and  knew  how  to  value 
the  sympathy  and  protection  of  ahen  peoples.  The 
patriarchs,  however,  according  to  tradition,  sometimes 
in  other  respects  discriminated  against  strangers: 
Abraham,  for  example,  when  he  sent  his  steward  to  the 
land  of  his  birth  to  get  a  wife  for  his  son  Isaac  ;4  and 
Jacob  when,  doubtless  with  the  approval  of  his  parents, 
he  chose  his  wives  from  his  mother's  family.  This 
policy,  however,  could  not  be  maintained.  Dinah 
yielded  to  the  wooing  of  Shechem,^  and  Judah  sought 
his  wife  among  the  Canaanites.^  Indeed,  all  the  sons 
of  Jacob  must  have  done  the  same,  except  Joseph, 
whose  wife  was  an  Egyptian.  These  alliances  were 
the  more  readily  formed,  since  the  Hebrews  and  the 
Canaanites  spoke  the  same  language — ^were,  in  fact, 

'  Gen.  26 :  26  ff .  •♦  Gen.  24 :  i  ff . 

2  Gen.  18:  iff.  s  Gen.  34:2. 

sGen.  igiiff.  <*  Gen.  38:2. 


42  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

nearly  related  branches  of  the  same  race.  Thus  the 
Hebrews  acquired  a  claim  on  the  land  of  Canaan  that 
furnished  them  with  a  warrant  for  invading  the  country 
when  they  escaped  from  bondage  in  Egypt. 

Reference  has  been  made  to  the  treaties  made  by 
the  patriarchs  with  their  neighbors.  There  is  nothing 
to  indicate  that  these  covenants  were  not  loyally  ful- 
j  filled.^'^his  is  explained  by  the  fact  that,  although, 
I  as  has  been  seen,  the  Hebrews  regarded  deception  for 
'  the  sake  of  personal  advantage  or  protection  as  allowable, 
and  the  best  of  them  sometimes  resorted  to  falsehood, 
they  had  the  greatest  respect  for  an  oath.  They  there- 
fore, when  anything  of  consequence  was  involved, 
required  such  security.  Thus,  when  Abraham  sent 
his  servant  to  Mesopotamia,  he  put  him  under  oath 
faithfully  to  fulfil  his  mission,^  and  Jacob,  when  he  was 
d)dng,  although  he  had  not  the  slightest  reason  to 
doubt  the  devotion  of  his  distinguished  son,  required 
him  to  take  a  similar  oath.^*  Such  an  oath,  as  Heb. 
6:i6  puts  it,  was  "final  for  confirmation."  Therefore 
Jacob  and  Laban,  each  of  whom  had  abundant  reason 
for  distrusting  the  other,  when  they  had  made  the 
covenant  suggested  by  the  latter,^  went  their  opposite 
ways  satisfied  ;4  and  Abimelech,  although  he  had  given 
Isaac  good  ground  for  resentment,  when  the  customary 
rites  had  been  performed,  went  home  secure  against 
future  retaliation.^  It  is  in  harmony  with  this  hardly 
creditable  custom  that,  in  Gen.  15:75.,  Yahweh  him- 

^  Gen.  24:2  f.  4  Gen.  31:46. 

*  Gen.  47:31.  s  Gen.  26:31. 

3  Not,  as  in  the  received  text,  Jacob. 


THE  PATRIARCHAL  PERIOD  43 

self  is  represented  as  taking  an  oath  to  satisfy  Abraham 
that  he  and  Sarah  were  really  to  have  a  son. 

The  survey  of  the  Patriarchal  Period,  as  described 
in  the  Judean  narrative,  the  best  of  the  Hebrew  authori- 
ties on  the  subject,  is  now  complete.  The  result  is 
not  entirely  satisfactory,  since,  as  has  already  more  than 
once  been  intimated,  it  is  impossible  to  say  how  old  or 
how  rehable  were  the  sources  from  which  the  author 
drew,  or  how  freely  he  handled  the  materials  at  his 
disposal.  There  are,  however,  limits  to  the  uncertainty 
thus  produced.  In  the  first  place,  it  may  be  assumed 
that  the  patriarchs,  if  they  were  real  persons,  were  no 
better  than  they  are  depicted.  On  the  other  hand, 
when  one  reads  the  Code  of  Hammurabi,  which  is  at 
least  as  old  as  the  time  of  Abraham,  and  may  be  from 
one  to  two  centuries  older,  and  considers  the  ethical 
progress  it  represents,  these  Hebrew  worthies,  who  hved 
within  the  radius  of  its  operation  and  influence,  do 
not  seem  to  be  much  overdrawn. 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE  PERIOD  OF  THE  EXODUS 

It  seems  a  formidable  task  to  discuss  the  ethical 
teaching  of  the  period  spent  by  the  Hebrews  on  their 
way  from  Egypt  to  the  Promised  Land,  when  one  con- 
siders the  amount  of  space  given  to  it  in  the  Pentateuch 
— the  whole  of  the  last  four  books — and  how  much  of 
this  space  is  devoted  to  ethical  precepts.  There  are, 
first,  the  commands  and  prohibitions  of  the  Decalogue 
in  Exod.,  chap.  20,  repeated,  with  some  modifications, 
in  Deut.,  chap.  5.  They  are  followed,  in  the  first 
instance,  by  the  so-called  Book  of  the  Covenant,  Exod., 
20 : 2 2 — 23 133.  The  contents  of  both  the  Decalogue  and 
the  Book  of  the  Covenant  are  largely  repeated,  with 
variations  and  additions,  in  Lev.,  chaps.  17-26,  a 
section  that  is  commonly  designated  as  the  Law  of 
Holiness.  The  first  of  these  codes,  according  to  Exod. 
24:3  ff.,  was  promulgated  soon  after  the  arrival  of  the 
Hebrews  at  Sinai,  and  the  second,  according  to  Lev. 
26:46,  before  their  departure  from  that  vicinity.  The 
latter  is  noticeably  elaborate,  as  compared  with  the 
other,  yet  it  was  not  final,  for,  when  Moses  was  on  the 
point  of  leaving  his  people  in  Moab,  he  gave  them,  we 
are  told,  a  third,  including  the  second  version  of  the 
Decalogue,  which  has  been  preserved  in  Deuteronomy. 
The  three,  with  scattered  passages  of  ethical  significance, 
furnish  an  amount  of  material  that  would  be  wel- 
come, if  it  were  a  homogeneous  collection,  but  which, 
in  its  present  form,  is  simply  confusing.     Fortunately, 

44 


THE  PERIOD  OF  THE  EXODUS  45 

the  case  is  not  so  dijfficult  as  it  seems.  The  critical 
analysis  of  the  Pentateuch  has  shown  that  these  codes 
were  produced  at  intervals,  not  of  months  or  years, 
but  of  centuries,  and  that  even  the  oldest  of  them,  as 
transmitted,  does  not  belong  to  the  period  of  the  Exodus, 
The  Judean  narrative  has  no  place  for  it.  Its  account 
of  the  stay  at  the  sacred  mount,  in  brief,  is  as  follows : 

The  Hebrews  came  from  the  Red  Sea  by  the  way  of 
Meribah  and  encamped  at  the  foot  of  the  mountain;' 
Yahweh  summoned  Moses  and  instructed  him  to  pre- 
pare for  a  solemn  interview  on  the  following  day.^  The 
next  morning  Moses  again  went  up  into  the  mountain, 
where  Yahweh  met  him  and  dictated  to  him  the  terms 
of  a  covenant  between  himself  and  Israel;^  Moses  put 
these  terms  into  writing  and  afterward  he  and  Aaron, 
Nadab,  and  Abihu  with  seventy  of  the  elders  ate  and 
drank  before  Yahweh  in  the  mount  in  confirmation  of 
the  covenant  based  upon  them.'*  Then  Yahweh  com- 
manded that  Moses  and  his  people  proceed  to  Canaan; 
whereat  the  people  were  at  first  greatly  disturbed. s 
Before  they  started  Hobab  visited  the  camp,  and  Moses 
persuaded  him  to  cast  his  lot  with  the  children  of 
Israel.^ 

This  account,  to  be  sure,  contains  a  series  of  com- 
mandments,^  supposed  to  have  constituted  a  Decalogue, 

^  Exod.  15:22a;   17:7;   19:2b.        *  Exod.  19:18,  20  f.,  25;  34:2f. 
3  Exod.  34:4  ("and  Moses  ....  commanded  him"),  5a,  8,  10 
("And  ....  covenant"),  14  (except  "for"),  17,  19a,  21  f.,  25  f. 
"Exod.  34:27  f.;   24:1,9-11. 
5  Exod.  33: 1,  3a,  4  (except  "these  evil  tidings"). 
*5  Exod.  18:7,  9-11  (except  "Jethro"  twice);  Num.  10:29-32. 
7  Exod.  34:io£f. 


46  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

all  of  which,  however,  are  purely  religious  regulations. 
Three  of  them  agree  with  the  first,  second,  and  fourth 
of  the  Decalogue  in  Exod.,  chap.  20,  the  rest  having 
to  do  with  feasts,  firsthngs,  and  first-fruits,  except  the 
last,  which  corresponds  to  Exod.  23 :  19.^ 

The  absence  of  ethical  precepts  in  the  Judean 
narrative  is  not  so  strange  as  at  first  sight  it  appears. 
The  Hebrews  had  just  escaped  from  bondage.  They 
attributed  their  success  to  the  assistance  of  Yahweh. 
Their  first  duty,  therefore,  was,  not  to  construct  an 
elaborate  code  for  the  day  when  they  expected  to  enter 
Canaan,  but  to  recognize  in  a  fitting  manner  the  hand 
of  their  God  in  their  dehverance  and  renew  their  alle- 
giance to  him;  and  that  is  what,  according  to  this 
narrative,  they  did,  pledging  themselves  to  worship 
him  alone  and  practice  observances  that  would  mark 
them  as  his  worshipers. 

It  should  also  be  noted  that  the  Hebrews,  although 
they  had  for  a  long  time  been  oppressed,  cannot  have 
been  the  barbarians  they  have  sometimes  been  imagined. 
They  came  from  the  same  stock  with  one  of  the  most 
enhghtened  rulers  of  antiquity.  Their  fathers  had  Hved 
and  thriven  under  the  laws  that  he  had  codified.  Later 
they  had  enjoyed  the  favor  of  the  kings  of  Egypt.  They 
may  have  had  written  precepts  or  regulations;  they 
certainly  had  a  traditional  code,  suited  to  their  simple 
hfe,  by  which  they  were  governed;  and  this  was  sufficient 
when  they  were  again  free,  so  long  as  their  mode  of  life 
remained  unchanged,  as  it  did  in  the  desert. 

This  does  not  mean  that  the  moral  standards  of 
the  Hebrews  at  the  Exodus  were  ideal,  or  even  as  high 

^  See  further  pp.  109  f. 


THE  PERIOD  OF  THE  EXODUS  47 

as  they  had  previously  been.  The  people  had  been 
oppressed,  and  tradition  confesses  that  they  were  to  a 
serious  degree  demoralized;  but  they  could  not  deny 
their  descent  from  Abraham,  and  some  of  them  showed 
themselves  worthy  of  their  lineage.  Nor  is  this  all  that 
can  safely  be  asserted.  The  Exodus  was  an  event 
calculated  to  produce  a  great  moral  uplift,  and  this 
because  it  was  more  to  those  who  were  then  delivered 
from  slavery  than  a  display  of  the  power  of  Yahweh. 
In  the  preceding  chapter  reference  was  made  to  the 
promise  of  Yahweh  to  Abraham  and  the  oath  by  which 
it  was  confirmed.'  It  is  not  necessary  to  prove  that 
such  a  covenant  was  ever  actually  made.  It  is  enough 
that  the  descendants  of  the  patriarch  beheved  that 
there  had  been  such  a  transaction.^  When,  therefore, 
Moses  returned  to  Egypt  from  Midian,  he  proclaimed 
himself  a  messenger  of  the  God  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and 
Jacob  ,^  and  when  at  length  he  and  his  people  found 
themselves  beyond  the  reach  of  their  enemies,  they 
saw  in  the  result  a  moral  as  well  as  a  physical  trimnph, 
an  illustrious  example  of  the  faithfulness  of  Yahweh. 
They  were  therefore  willing  and  eager,  when  they  were 
out  of  danger,  to  enter  into  a  covenant  to  serve  their 
DeHverer  in  any  way  that  he  was  pleased  to  prescribe.'* 
Some  of  them  afterward  forgot  this  engagement,  but 

^  Gen.  15:35. 

'Exod.  33:1;  Num.  11:12. 

3  Exod.  3:16;  4:29  f. 

4  The  prevalence  of  the  idea  that  the  God  of  the  Exodus  was  the 
God  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob  militates  against  the  view  proposed 
by  Budde,  that  the  Hebrews  first  became  acquainted  with  Yahweh 
through  Moses'  father-in-law,  the  priest  of  Midian.  See,  also,  the 
name  Reuel,  which  is  equally  unfavorable. 


48  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

they  were  punished  by  the  severest  penalties  for  their 
disloyalty.^ 

There  is  another  moral  attribute  that  is  emphasized 
in  the  Judean  account  of  the  Exodus,  namely,  com- 
passion. It  was  his  compassion,  Yahweh  is  repre- 
sented as  saying  in  his  first  interview  with  Moses, ^ 
that  prompted  him  to  undertake  the  deliverance  of 
his  people  from  the  cruelty  of  their  oppressors;  and 
it  was  his  sympathy  for  them  that  moved  them  to  test 
his  faithfulness. 3  This  sympathy  was  bestowed  without 
regard  to  the  character  of  the  recipients.  There  are 
other  passages  in  which  Yahweh  is  represented  as 
exercising  a  similar  tenderness  toward  his  people  in 
spite  of  their  unworthiness.  Thus,  in  Exod.  34:6f., 
he  is  made  to  proclaim  himself  "a  God  full  of  com- 
passion and  gracious,  slow  to  anger,  and  plenteous  in 
kindness  and  faithfulness,  keeping  [showing  continued] 
kindness  to  thousands,  forgiving  iniquity,  and  trans- 
gression, and  sin";  but  these  are  later  additions  to  the 
original  work. 

The  person  most  prominent  in  the  history  of  the 
Exodus,  of  course,  is  Moses.  In  Num.  12:3  he  is 
described  by  a  later  writer  as  "very  meek  above  all  the 
men  that  were  on  the  face  of  the  earth."  The  Judean 
narrator  is  not  so  extravagant,  but  he  also  pictures  the 
great  leader  as  remarkably  humble;  for  it  is  he  who 
represents  him  as  shrinking  from  undertaking  the 
mission  to  Egypt  because  he  feared  that  his  people 
would  not  recognize  him  as  a  messenger  of  Yahweh, 
and  that  he  was  not  sufficiently  gifted  in  speech  to 

*  Num.  25:4.  »  Exod.  3:16  f.;  4:31. 

»Exod.  3:7  f. 


THE  PERIOD  OF  THE  EXODUS  49 

overcome  their  unbelief.^  The  only  other  person  who 
deserves  mention  in  this  connection  is  Caleb,  whose 
courage  the  author  records  in  Num.  13:30  with  evident 
approbation. 

The  passages  concerning  Moses  that  have  been 
cited  reveal  only  one  side  of  his  character.  There  are 
others  which  describe  him  as  giving  way  to  anger  or 
even  violence.  Thus,  it  will  be  remembered  that  he 
killed  an  Egyptian  for  smiting  a  Hebrew,  and  fled  the 
country  because  he  was  threatened  with  exposure.^ 
Later,  when  some  of  his  followers  accused  him  of  failure 
as  a  leader  and  refused  to  obey  him,  he  is  said  to  have 
become  "very  wroth"  and  to  have  called  down  upon 
them  a  dreadful  penalty  from  Yahweh.^  The  latter  of 
these  two  incidents  illustrates  a  serious  defect  in  the 
Hebrews'  idea  of  justice.  They  identified  the  interests 
and  responsibiHties  of  the  individual  so  completely  with 
those  of  the  family  or  other  collective  body  that,  when 
one  of  the  members  offended,  all  had  to  share  in  the 
penalty.  Here,  for  example,  neither  Moses  nor  the 
author  seems  to  have  thought  it  anything  but  just  that, 
not  only  the  men  who  had  been  guilty  of  insubordina- 
tion, but  "all  that  appertained  to  them,"  that  is,  as 
appears  from  vs.  27,  their  wives  and  children,  "went 
down  ahve  into  Sheol.""*  The  same  criticism  may 
justly  be  made  with  reference  to  the  plagues  inflicted 
upon  the  Egyptians.  According  to  Exod.  7:14  it  was 
Pharaoh  who  was  responsible  for  the  detention  of  the 
Hebrews;  yet  the  humblest  and  most  innocent  of  his 
subjects  suffered  equally  with  him  when  the  water 

*  Exod.  4:1  £f.  3  Num.  16:15,  31,  33a. 

"  Exod.  2 : 1 1  ff .  4  Num.  16:33;  also  21:3. 


50  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

of  the  Nile  was  polluted  and  the  fish  that  were  in  it 
perished;'  when  the  land  was  defiled  with  decaying 
frogs;*  when  the  cattle  throughout  the  country  were 
destroyed  by  a  plague^  and  the  crops  by  hail^  and 
locusts  ;s  and,  finally,  when  the  firstborn  perished  in  a 
night,  "from  the  firstborn  of  Pharaoh  that  sat  on  his 
throne  to  the  firstborn  of  the  captive  that  was  in  the 
dungeon."^  It  took  the  Hebrews  a  long  time  to  learn 
that  such  indiscriminate  penalties  were  acts,  not  of 
justice,  but  of  cruelty .^ 

In  the  preceding  chapter  attention  was  called  to 
the  carelessness  of  the  early  Hebrews  in  reference  to 
the  truth  unless  they  were  under  oath.  It  seems 
strange  that  Moses  should  be  represented  as  sharing 
this  defect,  yet  such  is  the*  fact.  Indeed,  Yahweh 
himself  is  impHcated,  for,  when  he  sent  Moses  to  Egypt, 
he  put  into  his  mouth  the  request,  "Let  us  go,  we  pray 
thee,  three  days*  journey  into  the  desert,  that  we  may 
sacrifice  to  Yahweh  our  God."^  The  language  used 
naturally  impHes  that  the  Hebrews  intended  to  return 
to  Eg3rpt  after  the  proposed  feast.  Pharaoh  so  imder- 
stood  it,  and  Moses  had  to  invent  one  excuse  after 
another  for  rejecting  the  king's  concessions  to  prevent 
him  from  discovering  his  mistake.  Thus,  when  Pharaoh 
suggested  that  the  people  sacrifice  "in  the  land," 
Moses  objected  that  they  would  thus  offend  the  Egyp- 
tians.'* When  the  king  consented  to  let  them  go  without 
their  cattle,  the  Hebrew  leader  insisted  that  they  must 
take  their  cattle  with  them  because  they  should  not 

^Exod.  7:21a.     <Exod.9:2sb.     'Deut.  24:16. 
*Exod.  8:9f.      s  Exod.  10:15b.     «Exod.  3:18. 
3  Exod.  9:6.       ^  Exod.  10 :  29.     '  Exod.  8 :  25  f . 


THE  PERIOD  OF  THE  EXODUS  51 

know  which  or  how  many  of  the  animals  Yahweh 
would  require  until  they  reached  the  place  of  sacrifice/ 
These  excuses  worked  so  well  that,  when  Pharaoh  finally 
yielded,  he  supposed  he  was  granting  only  a  brief 
respite  from  labor.  "Go,''  he  said,  "serve  Yahweh, 
as  ye  have  said."^  When,  therefore  he  heard  that 
"the  people  were  fled,"  he  made  haste  to  pursue  them.^ 
It  will  be  interesting,  later  on,  to  compare  with  this 
unbiased  version  of  the  story  of  Moses'  negotiations 
with  Pharaoh  the  parallel  accounts  in  the  other 
narratives. 

It  remains  to  notice  the  attitude  of  the  Hebrews  of 
the  period  of  the  Exodus  toward  other  peoples.  They 
would  naturally  feel  hostile  toward  their  oppressors — 
which  should  perhaps  be  taken  into  account  before 
condemning  too  severely  the  display  of  cunning  that 
has  just  been  discussed — but  there  is  no  indication  of 
any  such  feeling  toward  other  foreigners.  On  the 
contrary,  they  seem  to  have  welcomed,  as  they  naturally 
would,  any,  of  whatever  kindred,  who  were  prepared 
to  make  common  cause  with  them  in  their  effort  for 
freedom.  Thus,  when  they  left  Egypt,  according  to 
Exod.  12:38,  they  were  accompanied  by  "a  mixed 
multitude"  of  foreigners,  who  finally  tired  of  the  monoto- 
nous fare  of  the  desert  but  complained  no  more  bitterly 
than  did  the  children  of  Israel  on  the  same  occasion."* 
Meanwhile  Moses,  whose  wife  was  a  Midianite,  had 
added  to  their  number  by  persuading  Hobab,  his 
father-in-law,  to  migrate  to  Canaan.^  Finally  Caleb,  a 
Kenizzite,  whose  family  afterward  became  numerous  and 

^  Exod.  10 :  24  f .  3  Exod.  14:5!.  s  Num.  10 :  29  ff . 

^Exod.  12:31.  '•Num.  11:4. 


52  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

influential  in  southern  Palestine,  joined  forces  with  him/ 
It  appears,  then,  that,  when  the  Hebrews  entered 
Palestine,  they  were  by  no  means  a  homogeneous  people, 
but  included  a  considerable  admixture  of  foreigners 
to  whom  they  gladly  gave  the  privilege  of  sharing 
their  fortunes. 

*  Num.  13:30;  also  Judg.  1:12  ff. 


CHAPTER  V 
THE  HEROIC  PERIOD 

The  Hebrews — or  some  of  them — probably  migrated 
to  Egypt  during  the  dominance' of  the  Hyksos,  that  is, 
before  1580  B.C.,  and  escaped  from  bondage  there  in 
the  reign  of  Merenptah,  that  is,  between  1225  and 
1 21 5  B.C.  Meanwhile  Palestine  had  undergone  various 
and  interesting  vicissitudes.  After  the  Hyksos  had 
been  expelled  the  Egyptians  took  possession  of  it  and 
held  it,  sometimes  with  difficulty,  for  about  two  cen- 
turies. Then  the  natives,  assisted  by  other  Semites, 
taking  advantage  of  the  peaceable  disposition  of  Amen- 
hotep  IV  (1375-1350  B.C.),  seem' to  have  gained  their 
independence.  When  Seti  I  (13 13-1292  B.C.),  of  the 
XlXth  Dynasty,  came  to  the  throne,  he  again  invaded 
the  country,  and  Rameses  II  (1292-12 25  B.C.),  who  is 
commonly  identified  with  the  Pharaoh  of  the  oppression, 
so  completely  subjugated  and  defended  it,  that  during 
the  rest  of  his  reign  it  remained  tranquil  and  the 
relations  between  it  and  Egypt  became  very  intimate.^ 

The  same  state  of  things  seems  to  have  continued 
for  some  time  after  the  accession  of  Merenptah.  At 
any  rate,  in  his  eighth  year  Semites  were  still  free  to 
enter  the  country  occupied  by  the  Hebrews.^  Later, 
however,  there  was  trouble  in  Palestine,  and  this  king, 

^  Petrie,  History  of  Egpyt,  III,  71;  Records  of  the  Past',  II,  loiff. 

2  A  frontier  ofl&cial  reports  the  admission  of  a  tribe  of  nomads 
into  the  region  of  Succoth  to  feed  themselves  and  their  cattle:  Petrie, 
op.  cit.,  Ill,  114  f. 

S3 


54  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

if  his  own  story  is  to  be  trusted,  severely  punished  its 
inhabitants,  including  a  tribe  called  Israel,'  Hebrews, 
perhaps,  who  had  not  been  in  Egypt  or  had  made  an 
earlier  exodus.^  Later  still  the  country  was  threatened 
from  the  north  by  a  coalition  which  was  defeated  by 
Rameses  III,^  but  by  the  time  the  Hebrews  appeared 
east  of  the  Jordan  (1175  B.C.),  the  PhiKstines  (Purusatu), 
who  were  a  part  of  the  defeated  movement,  and  some 
of  their  confederates  had  already  gotten  possession  of 
the  sea-coast.-* 

It  appears,  then,  that  when  the  Hebrews  from  Egypt 
invaded  Palestine  the  country  was  in  more  or  less  con- 
fusion, and  they  had  powerful  rivals  for  its  possession. 
This  condition  of  things  must  be  taken  into  account 
in  any  study  of  the  ethical  development  of  the  Chosen 
People  during  this  period.  It  is  easy  to  perceive  that 
in  such  a  period  great  importance  would  be  given  to 
physical  strength  and  prowess,  also  that  the  personal 
quaUties  most  esteemed  would  be  those  which,  if  not 
produced,  are  developed,  by  danger  and  hardship, 
namely,  courage  and  self-sacrifice.  The  heroes  of  the 
period  are  men  who  never  gave  place  to  fear,  but  were 
always  ready  to  stake  their  Uves  for  the  defense  of  their 
common  country  as  well  as  their  particular  tribes  or 
families. 

First  in  order  comes  Joshua.  He  is  not  mentioned 
in  the  Judean  account  of  the  Exodus,  so  far  as  it  has 

»  Breasted,  History  of  Egypt,  466. 

'Another  possibility  is  that  Israel  represents  a  tribe  into  which 
the  Hebrews  were  afterward  merged. 

3  Petrie,  op.  cit.,  Ill,  150  f.;  Breasted,  op.  cit.,  477  ff. 

4  Petrie,  op.  cit.,  Ill,  148;  Breasted,  op.  ciL,  512. 


THE  HEROIC  PERIOD  55 

been  preserved.  When,  therefore,  he  is  introduced,  he 
appears  to  better  advantage  than  in  the  Ephraimite 
narrative,  where  he  is  at  first  overshadowed  by  his 
master,  Moses.  It  is  also  in  his  favor  that  the  Judean 
narrator  does  not  represent  the  capture  of  Jericho  as  an 
entirely  miraculous  affair,  but  in  part  the  result  of  a 
furious  attack  by  the  Hebrews  led  by  Joshua  in  person.' 
In  this  and  all  the  rest  of  the  affairs  in  which  he  figures 
he  is  the  ideal  soldier  of  the  period  to  which  he  belongs.^ 
Caleb,  also,  is  a  favorite  with  the  Judean  author,  and 
for  the  same  reason.^  The  Song  of  Deborah"*  is  largely 
devoted  to  praise  for  Barak  and  other  (nameless) 
heroes  who,  whether  great  or  small,  "offered  them- 
selves wilhngly"  at  the  battle  of  the  Kishon,^  and 
reproach  for  those  who,  for  any  reason,  "came  not  to 
the  help  of  Yahweh  ....  among  the  mighty."^  The 
prophetess  would  have  commended  Ehud,  in  spite  of  his 
treacherous  method,  for  putting  to  death  single-handed 
the  tyrant  Eglon.''  Indeed,  she  invokes  upon  the 
Kenite  Jael  blessings  above  the  lot  of  other  women  that 
dwelt  in  tents  for  murdering  a  man  who,  exhausted  by 
his  efforts  to  escape  from  the  victorious  Hebrews,  had 

*Josh.  6:iof.,  14,  15  ("And  ....  manner"),  i6b,  17  ("And 
.  .  .  .  house"),  19,  20  ("So  the  people  shouted" — "and  they  took 
the  city"),  21. 

'  There  are  those  who  reduce  the  Judean  element  in  the  Book  of 
Joshua  to  such  an  extent  as  to  eliminate  Joshua;  but  there  is  good 
authority  for  maintaining  that  chaps.  7-9  are  largely  from  this  source. 
See  especially  Moore  in  Encyclopaedia  Biblica,  art.  "Joshua  (Book)," 
§§6ff. 

3  Num.  13:30;  Josh.  15:145.;  Judg.  i:ioff. 

-*  Judg.,  chap.  5.  ^  Vss.  16  f .,  23. 

s  Vss.  2,  9,  13  fiE.,  18.  Tjudg.  3:i6ff. 


56  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

thrown  himself  upon  her  mercy/  In  Gideon  is  por- 
trayed a  man  as  daring  as  he  was  resourceful;  who  also 
had  a  sense  of  humor,  as  is  shown  in  his  rough  and  ready 
treatment  of  the  wits  of  Succoth  and  Penuel  when  he 
returned  from  the  overthrow  of  Zeba  and  Zalmunna.^ 
Samson,  to  judge  from  the  stories  told  of  him,  was  almost 
a  buffoon,  yet  his  wantonness  in  this  and  even  more 
serious  respects  did  not  quench  the  admiration  felt  for 
his  reckless  devotion,  to  the  very  last  of  his  brief  Hfe,  to 
the  deHverance  of  his  people.  There  are  two  others 
who  must  not  be  overlooked,  Saul  and  Jonathan.  The 
Judean  writer  could  hardly  be  expected  to  do  justice 
to  the  former;  yet  he  could  not  conceal  his  admiration 
for  the  king's  early  achievements,  and  the  son  is  even 
more  favorably  treated.^  He  tells  the  story  of  their 
heroic  death  with  evident  sympathy,  and  quotes  David's 
lament  as  his  warrant  for  numbering  them  among 
Israel's  greatest.'* 

In  the  preceding  paragraph  reference  was  made  to 
falsehood  as  one  of  the  defects  of  some  of  the  persons 
named,  as  in  the  case  of  the  He  by  which  Ehud  gained 
a  private  audience  with  Eglon,^  and  the  simulation  of 
hospitaUty  by  which  Jael  deceived  Sisera.^  This  was 
also  one  of  Samson's  failings:  witness  the  lies  he  told 
Delilah  when  she  asked  him  what  was  the  secret  of  his 
strength. 7  It  was  by  a  pretense  of  weariness  that  he 
got  the  opportunity  to  pull  down  the  building  in  which 
he  perished  with  his  tormentors.^ 

»Judg.  5:24.  sjudg.  3:19. 

»Judg.  8:5ff.  "Jjudg.  5:2sflF. 

3 1  Sam.  9:2;   11:6  £F.;  14:1  ff.        '  Judg.  16:7,  11,  13. 
*  n  Sam.  1 :  19  ff .  » Judg.  16 :  26. 


THE  HEROIC  PERIOD  57 

The  weakness  of  Samson  for  women  has  also  been 
alluded  to.  The  casual  way  in  which  two  instances  are 
introduced,^  one  after  the  other,  shows  that  in  this 
heroic,  as  in  the  preceding  periods,  the  harlot  was 
openly  tolerated,  and  dealings  with  her,  even  by  married 
men,  were  not  generally  regarded  as  imnioral.  The 
same  point  is  illustrated  in  the  case  of  the  harlot  Rahab, 
who,  because  she  saved  the  Hebrew  spies  from  capture 
by  her  nimble  falsehoods,  was  counted  worthy  to  survive, 
with  her  family,  the  slaughter  in  which  all  the  rest  of 
the  people  of  Jericho  perished.^  It  should,  however, 
be  noted  that  sodomy  was  evidently  condemned,^  and, 
although  a  husband  might  forgive  wantonness  in  a  wife 
or  concubine,^  the  violation  of  a  married  woman  was  a 
crime  that  could  not  be  overlooked. ^ 

The  point  just  made  properly  comes  under  the  head 
of  domestic  ethics,  on  which  this  period  furnishes 
comparatively  little  material.  There  is  nothing  to 
indicate  that  the  position  of  woman  was  generally  any 
higher  than  in  earlier  times.  The  husband  still  com- 
monly bought  his  wife  of  her  father.  If  he  was  poor, 
but  otherwise  desirable,  a  compensation  of  another  kind 
was  arranged,  as  when  Saul  stipulated  that  David 
should  bring  him  the  foreskins  of  a  hundred  Philistines.^ 
When  the  Benjamites  had  been  reduced  to  six  hundred 
males,  and  the  question  arose  how  they  were  to  be 
supplied  with  wives,  the  people,  who  had  sworn  not  to 
give  their  daughters  to  the  survivors,  allowed  them 
to  supply  themselves  by  kidnaping  girls  at  the  feast  at 

^  Judg.  16:1,  4.  "  Judg.  19:3. 

^  Josh.  2:4b-5a;  6:2sa.  ^  Judg.  20:8,  19,  44. 

3judg.  19:22.  ^I  Sam.  18:25. 


58  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

Shiloh/  a  proceeding  that  was  entirely  in  accord  with 
the  spirit  and  practice  of  the  period.  In  this  period, 
too,  men  held  women  cheap,  so  cheap  that  the  Levite 
of  this  story  surrendered  his  helpless  concubine  to  a 
mob  to  save  himself  from  maltreatment.^  There  was 
one,  however,  whom  those  of  her  time  were  obKged  to 
respect  and  obey,  the  prophetess  Deborah,  who  was 
the  soul  of  the  movement  that  resulted  in  the  over- 
throw of  Sisera  and  opened  the  way  for  the  imion  of 
the  tribes  under  Saul  and  David. 

There  were  slaves  in  Israel  in  this  as  in  the  preceding 
periods.  From  the  Song  of  Deborah^  one  learns  how 
some  of  them  were  obtained.  They  were  generally 
treated  as  members  of  the  family.  Thus  Saul  makes 
one  of  them  his  companion  in  the  search  for  his  father's 
asses  ;4  and  Abigail  takes  counsel  with  one  of  those 
belonging  to  her  husband  Nabal.^  Benziger  uses  these 
passages  to  sustain  the  opinion  that  Hebrew  slavery 
was  "a  blessing  for  master  and  servant,"^  but  no  amount 
of  patronage  can  atone  to  a  hirnian  being  for  the  lack 
of  his  or  her  natural  rights.  Some  of  the  female  slaves 
became  the  concubines  of  their  masters.  The  one 
whose  cruel  death  at  Gibeah  aroused  the  indignation 
of  all  the  rest  of  Israel  against  the  tribe  of  Benjamin 
has  already  been  mentioned.  The  only  one  mentioned 
by  name  is  Rizpah,  a  wife  of  Saul,  whose  devotion  to 
her  sons  is  one  of  the  most  pathetic  manifestations  of 
maternal  love  described  in  the  Old  Testament.  It  was 
she  who  was  the  innocent  occasion  of  the  breach  between 

*  Judg.  21:17  f.,  19  f.  (in  part).        <  I  Sam.  9:5  ff. 

'  Judg.  19 : 25.  si  Sam.  25 :  14 ff. 

'  Vs.  30.  ^  Hcbraische  Archaologie,  isg. 


THE  HEROIC  PERIOD  59 

Ishbaal,  who,  in  accordance  with  the  custom  of  the 
time,  expected  to  inherit  her  with  the  Kingdom,  and 
Abner,  who  had  taken  possession  of  her,  and,  because 
Ishbaal  asserted  his  claim,  went  over  to  David.' 

Among  the  social  virtues  of  this  period  hospitality- 
is  prominent.  Gideon  was  prompt  to  offer  his  unknown 
visitor  entertainment,*  and  Manoah  was  equally  hos- 
pitable.^ The  people  of  Succoth  and  Penuel  refused 
to  supply  Gideon  with  food  for  his  weary  warriors,  and 
he  punished  them  severely  for  their  churHshness,  with 
the  evident  approval  of  the  narrator.^  The  Levite 
expected  to  be  hospitably  received  at  Gibeah.  The  old 
man  who  finally  gave  him  shelter  regarded  the  attack 
upon  him  as  a  violation  of  sacred  rights  and  the 
indignation  aroused  throughout  Israel  was  doubtless 
due  to  sympathy  with  the  Levite  rather  than  his  unfor- 
tunate concubine.s 

Here,  again,  it  is  necessary  to  call  attention  to  the 
inconsistency  of  the  Hebrews  in  trifling  with  the  truth 
in  the  ordinary  relations  of  life  and  insisting  upon  the 
strictest  observance  of  formal  covenants.  Thus  Rahab 
is  represented  as  lying  without  the  slightest  hesitation 
to  the  messengers  of  her  king,  but  the  Hebrews  as 
scrupulously  redeeming  their  promise  to  protect  her 
when  the  city  was  taken.*  More  notable  still  is  the 
case  of  the  Gibeonites.  They  obtained  by  fraud  a 
promise  of  exemption  from  the  fate  to  which  the  Canaan- 
ites  generally  had  been  devoted;  yet,  when  Joshua 
discovered  that  he  had  been  duped,  he  stood  by  the 

^11  Sam.  3:75.  4judg.  8:4£f. 

*Judg.  6:8.  sjudg.  19:11  ff. 

sjudg.  13:15.  ^Josh.  2:4b-5a;  6:2sa. 


6o  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

letter  of  his  engagement  and  "delivered  them  not 
into  the  hands  of  the  children  of  Israel."'  Saul  would 
have  sacrificed  his  son  Jonathan  in  fulfilment  of  a 
hasty  adjuration,  had  not  the  people  intervened  and 
absolved  him  from  it.''  Here  belongs,  also,  the  touching 
story  of  Jonathan's  loyalty  to  David  in  spite  of  the 
knowledge  that  the  popularity  of  the  young  Bethle- 
hemite  was  hateful  to  his  father  and  would  inevitably 
block  his  own  way  to  the  throne.^  David  did  not 
overstate  the  matter  when  he  said  in  his  lament  over 
his  fallen  friend, 

Thy  love  to  me  was  wonderful, 
Passing  the  love  of  women.-* 

This  reverence  for  oaths  and  covenants  was  doubtless 
fostered  by  the  traditional  doctrine  of  the  relation 
between  Yahweh  and  Israel,  of  which  the  ark  of  the 
covenant  was  a  symbol  and  constant  reminder.^ 

The  sense  of  justice  among  the  Hebrews  was  not 
noticeably  developed  during  this  period.  It  is  not 
clear  whether  Josh.  7 :  24  f .  should  be  cited  or  not  in 
this  connection.  This  passage,  in  its  present  form, 
recites  that  Joshua,  for  Achan's  fault,  destroyed,  not 
only  Achan  himself,  but  "the  silver,  and  the  mantle, 
and  the  wedge  of  gold,  and  his  sons,  and  his  daughters, 
and  his  oxen,  and  his  asses,  and  his  sheep,  and  his  tent, 
and  all  that  he  had";  but  some  of  these  particulars 
are  certainly,  and  all  of  them  possibly,  additions  to  the 
original  text.  It  is  possible,  however,  that  the  phrase 
in  vs.  24,  "all  that  he  had,"  that  is,  all  that  belonged  to 

^  Josh.  9 :  15b,  26.  <  II  Sam.  i :  26. 

» I  Sam.  14:24,  44  f.  5  Josh.  3:6,  11;  4:9  f.;  6:11. 

5 1  Sam.  2o:3off. 


THE  HEROIC  PERIOD  6i 

him,  may  include  his  wife  and  children.  See  Nimi. 
16:30,  where  it  certainly  has  quite  as  comprehensive 
a  m-eaning.  The  treatment  of  Benjamin  by  the  other 
tribes  on  account  of  the  injury  done  to  the  Levite  was 
not  only  unjust,  because  indiscriminate,  but  cruel  in 
the  extreme,  as  the  Israelites  themselves  finally  con- 
fessed,^ in  that  a  tribe  was  made  to  pay  for  the  life  of  a 
single  slave  with  the  loss  of  eighteen  thousand  men.* 
A  clearer  moral  vision  manifests  itself  in  the  indigna- 
tion created  by  the  inhuman  demand  of  Nahash  upon 
the  inhabitants  of  Jabesh  Gilead,^  the  protest  of  Jona- 
than against  his  father's  insane  jealousy  of  David,^ 
and  the  confession  of  Saul,  who,  in  one  of  his  saner 
moments,  acknowledged  that  he  had  treated  his  rival 
unjustly.^ 

The  Hebrews,  being  almost  constantly  at  war  with 
their  neighbors  during  this  period,  could  not  be  expected 
to  show  much  friendliness  toward  foreigners.  It  is  not 
strange,  therefore,  that  Manoah  and  his  wife  objected 
to  an  alliance  between  their  son  and  a  Philistine.^  It 
does,  however,  shock  the  modern  reader  to  learn  that 
they  often  killed  Gentiles  without  provocation  and 
sometimes  inflicted  upon  their  enemies  the  most  revolt- 
ing cruelties.  Thus  we  are  told  that,  when  they  invaded 
Canaan,  they  destroyed  the  entire  population  of  the 
cities  they  captured.'^  Later,  a  company  of  the  Danites 
migrated  to  the  north,  robbing  Micah  of  his  priest  and 

^Judg.  21:15.  '♦I  Sam.  20:32. 

'  Judg.  20:44.  'I  Sam.  24:17. 

3lSam.  11:6.  ^Judg.  14:2. 

7  Josh.  6:21;  Judg.  1:17,  25.  On  the  discrepancy  between  1:17 
and  Num.  21 : 1-3,  see  Moore,  Judges,  36. 


62  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

his  idols  on  the  way,'  and,  when  they  found  at  Laish 
"a  people  quiet  and  secure,"  "smote  them  with  the 
edge  of  the  sword"  and  took  possession  of  their  country.^ 
The  great  Danite,  Samson,  according  to  Judg.  I5:i4f., 
on  one  occasion  killed  a  thousand  men  in  his  own  defense, 
and,  according  to  Judg.  16:30,  *'the  dead  he  slew  in  his 
death,"  when  he  pulled  down  the  temple  of  Dagon  at 
Gaza,  "were  more  than  all  they  that  he  slew  in  his 
Hfe."  For  a  case  of  mutilation,  see  Judg.  i :5  f.  These 
and  other  instances  of  cruelty,  some  of  which  are  reported 
to  have  been  committed  by  the  express  direction  of 
Yahweh,  have  caused  many  devout  readers  of  the  Old 
Testament  no  little  perplexity.  The  question,  however, 
is  not,  as  these  good  men  and  women  have  put  it,  How 
could  a  just  God  ordain  such  things?  but.  How  could 
the  Hebrews  suppose  that  he  had  commanded  them? 
and  this  is  answered  by  saying  that  they  were  at  the 
time  morally  undeveloped. 

ijudg.  18:17  Q,  *Judg.  18:27. 


CHAPTER  VI 
THE  PERIOD  OF  DAVID  AND  SOLOMON 

The  Heroic  Period  was  one  of  constant  stress  and 
danger.  When  Saul  was  anointed,  Samuel  thought 
that  he  had  found  the  man  to  put  an  end  to  the  weari- 
some struggle  and  establish  permanent  security;  and 
the  new  king's  first  acts  went  far  toward  justifying 
this  expectation.  In  process  of  time,  however,  the 
burden  of  his  ofiice  unsettled  his  mind,  and,  when  he 
fell  in  the  desperate  encounter  with  the  Philistines  at 
Gilboa,  it  seemed  as  if  the  good  work  he  had  done  had 
come  to  naught.  This,  indeed,  would  have  been  the 
case  had  there  not  been  a  man  more  versatile  by  nature, 
and  more  thoroughly  trained  for  leadership,  to  prevent 
such  a  result.  It  was  David,  therefore,  who  really 
established  the  monarchy  and  thus  introduced  a  new 
period.  The  dynasty  he  founded  lasted  more  than 
four  centuries;  but,  since  the  kingdom  retained  its 
original  size  and  importance  only  during  his  reign  and 
that  of  his  son,  and  the  conditions  then  existing  may  be 
supposed  to  have  had  a  pecuHar  influence  on  the  ethics 
of  the  time,  the  period  next  to  be  considered  should 
close  with  the  death  of  Solomon.  It  was  a  period  of 
surpassing  military  strength,  industrial  prosperity,  and 
political  influence;  and  it  had  the  virtues  and  defects 
corresponding  to  these  conditions.  The  question  now 
is,  How  do  the  oldest  records  present  these  ethical 
phenomena  ? 

The  hero  of  this  period,  without  controversy,  was 
63 


64  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

David.  A  friend  described  him  to  Saul  as  not  only  a 
skilful  musician,  but  a  sturdy  fellow,  tried  in  war, 
prudent  in  speech,  and  withal  comely  in  person.'  Here 
the  young  man's  courage  and  prowess  are  especially 
emphasized.  It  is  therefore  not  strange  that  Saul  at 
once  made  him  his  adjutant,*  and  a  little  later  gave  him 
a  command,^  with  the  result  that  he  became  the  idol 
of  the  people.^  He  was  not  spoiled  by  their  plaudits, 
but  remained  humble,  protesting,  when  it  was  suggested 
that  he  might  have  Saul's  daughter,  that  he  was  not 
worthy  to  be  the  son-in-law  of  the  king.^  These  two 
characteristics,  courage  and  humility,  appear  elsewhere 
in  his  career.  To  be  sure,  he  fled  before  Saul,  and 
never  would  face  him  with  weapons;  but  that  was 
because  Saul  was  the  anointed  of  Yahweh^  and  the 
father  of  his  devoted  friend  Jonathan.?  He  fled  before 
Absalom,  also,  not  because  he  was  afraid,  but  because 
he  could  not  bring  himself  to  draw  his  sword  against 
his  own  son  and  initiate  a  civil  war.^  His  subjects 
thought  him  anything  but  a  coward.  Hushai,  it  will 
be  remembered,  warned  Absalom  not  to  be  in  too  much 
haste  to  follow  his  father,  "for,"  he  said,  "all  Israel 
know  that  thy  father  is  a  mighty  man" ;'  and  the  young 
man  heeded  the  warning.    David  did,  however,  now 

»ISam.  i6:i8.  3 1  Sam.  18:5. 

« I  Sam.  16:21.  '♦I  Sam.  18:7. 

si  Sam.  18:23;  see  also  I  Sam.  24:14,  where  David  speaks  of 
himself  as  "a  dead  dog"  and  "a  flea,"  that  is,  beneath  the  king's  notice. 

*5The  story  that  David  was  anointed  to  displace  Saul  before  the 
death  of  Samuel  (I  Sam.  16:  i  ff.)  belongs  to  a  later  date  than  the  Judean 
narrative. 

11  Sam.  24:6;  II  Sam.  4:10. 

*  II  Sam.  IS :  14.  » II  Sam.  17 :  10. 


THE  PERIOD  OF  DAVID  AND  SOLOMON         65 

and  then  show  a  lack  of  the  sturdy  moral  fiber  that 
should  characterize  the  genuine  soldier,  especially  in 
his  treatment  of  Joab,  whom  he  allowed  to  go  unpunished 
for  the  murder  of  Abner  and  Amasa/  He  abhorred 
these  vengeful  and  brutal  deeds,  but  he  confessed  him- 
self unable  to  reward  the  perpetrator  of  them  as  he 
deserved.  '*I  am  this  day  weak,"  said  he,  on  the 
occasion  of  the  death  of  Abner,  "though  anointed  king, 
and  these  men,  the  sons  of  Zeruiah,  are  too  hard  for 
me."  He  could  only  leave  the  murderer  in  the  hands 
of  Yahweh  to  punish  "according  to  his  wickedness."^ 
This  confession  is  characteristic  of  him.  He  was 
naturally  passionate  and  impulsive,  but,  when  brought 
face  to  face  with  his  errors  or  transgressions,  he 
acknowledged  them  and  uncomplainingly  took  the 
consequences.  His  conduct  when  Abigail  appealed 
to  him  not  to  give  way  to  ignoble  resentment  toward 
her  churlish  husband  was  worthy  of  a  candidate  for 
royalty ,3  and  the  humility  with  which  he  confessed  his 
crimes  against  Uriah  and  submitted  to  the  loss  of  the 
offspring  of  his  adulterous  passion  made  him  the  classic 
example  of  penitence  in  the  Old  Testament. "*  When 
there  occurred  a  plague  among  his  people,  and  his 
seer  interpreted  it  as  an  indication  of  the  divine  disap- 
proval on  account  of  a  census  that  he  had  recently 
taken,  he  made  no  protest,  but  quietly  took  upon  him- 
self all  the  blame  for  the  infliction.^ 

There  is  little  in  the  oldest  stratum  of  the  history 
of  Solomon,  as  given  in  the  first  Book  of  Kings,  that 

^  II  Sam.  3:27;   20:10.  4 II  Sam.  12:13,  22. 

» n  Sam.  3 :  39.  s  n  Sam.  24 :  i  flF. 

3 1  Sam.  25:32. 


66  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

bears  upon  his  private  character,  but  the  story  of  his 
vision  at  Gibeon'  is  significant,  and  almost  equally  so 
whether  it  is  historical  or  legendary,  since  in  either  case 
it  shows  what  a  Hebrew  toward  the  beginning  of  the 
monarchy  thought  should  be  the  attitude  of  a  king 
toward  his  office.  It  is  hardly  necessary  to  say  that 
nothing  could  be  more  admirable  or  appropriate  than 
the  childlike  spirit  in  which  Solomon  is  here  represented 
as  approaching  his  high  duties.  Unfortunately  he  does 
not  seem  to  have  retained  the  same  disposition  long 
after  his  accession. 

The  ethical  relations  of  the  family  do  not  seem  to  have 
been  improved  by  the  estabUshment  of  the  monarchy. 
The  position  of  woman  was  certainly  no  higher  than  it 
had  been.  The  husband  generally  obtained  his  wife  by 
a  virtual  purchase.  The  case  of  Michal,  the  daughter 
of  Saul,  as  has  already  been  intimated,  was  really  no 
exception.  David  appears  to  have  been  strongly 
attached  to  her,  for,  when  Abner  proposed  to  desert 
Ishbaal  and  follow  him,  the  king  demanded  that  he 
bring  Michal,  who  had  been  given  by  Saul  to  a  certain 
Paltiel,  with  him^  Yet  he  had  other  wives,  some  of 
whom  he  added  to  his  family  after  her  return.  Among 
them  were  Abigail,  with  whom,  after  Nabal's  death, 
he  must  have  received  a  considerable  fortune,  and 
Maacah,  a  daughter  of  the  chief  of  the  Geshurites,  to 
the  south  of  Philistia,^  with  whom  he  had  once  been 
at  war.4    He  had  seven  wives,  including  Michal,  before 

» I  Kings  3:55.  '  n  Sam.  3: 13  ff- 

3  According  to  II  Sam.  15:8,  Geshur  was  in  Syria,  but  Josh.  13:2, 
like  I  Sam.  27:8,  clearly  points  to  a  southern  tribe. 
4 1  Sam.  27:8;  II  Sam.  3:3. 


THE  PERIOD  OF  DAVID  AND  SOLOMON         67 

he  left  Hebron,  and  when  he  removed  to  Jerusalem 
he  took  others,  among  them  Bathsheba,  besides  at  least 
eleven  concubines/  Solomon  inherited  a  part  of  this 
estabhshment  and  doubtless  added  to  its  numbers, 
but  the  earHest  narrative  has  nothing  to  say  on  the 
subject. 

It  may  safely  be  taken  for  granted  that  the  subjects 
of  David  and  Solomon  were  prompt  to  follow  the  royal 
example,  and,  as  their  wealth  increased  under  a  stable 
government,  take  to  themselves  wives  as  many  as  they 
could  afford,  thus  increasing  the  evils  by  which  polygamy 
is  always  accompanied.  Some  of  these  evils  appear  in 
the  story.  Thus,  Bathsheba  persuaded  David  to  promise 
the  succession  to  Solomon,  her  son,  instead  of  Adonijah, 
the  natural  heir.  Thereupon  the  latter  undertook  to 
usurp  the  throne.  He  failed,  but  his  Hfe  was  spared 
until  he  asked  for  one  of  his  father's  concubines,  at 
which  Solomon  promptly  ordered  his  execution.^  David 
was  preparing  these  things  for  himself  and  his  family 
as  he  added  wife  to  wife,  but  his  biographer,  so  far  from 
noting  the  fact,  seems  to  have  regarded  him  as  fortunate 
and  enviable  in  having  so  numerous  a  harem. 

In  this  connection  reference  should  be  made  to  the 
story  of  Tamar,  from  which  it  appears  that  marriage 
between  children  of  the  same  father,  which  is  forbidden 
in  Lev.  20:17,  was  then  permissible.^  This  story  is 
interesting,  also,  as  showing  that,  in  spite  of  polygamy, 
the  promiscuous  indulgence  of  lust  was  not  countenanced. 
Indeed,  the  plea  of  Tamar  for  her  own  virtue  strikes  a 
new  note,  and  one  that  touches  the  reader  as  does  not 

^11  Sam.  11:27;   15:16;  I  Kings  1:3. 

^  I  Kings  2:13.  3 II  Sam.  13:13. 


68  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

the  wrath  of  her  father  or  the  vengeance  of  her  brother 
Absalom.  The  same  note  is  struck  by  Nathan  when 
he  comes  to  David  with  his  exquisite  parable.'  It 
makes  adultery  not  merely  an  injury  to  the  property 
of  a  neighbor,  but  a  wound  to  his  honor  and  his  tenderest 
ajffections,  and  stigmatizes  the  adulterer  as  a  social 
marauder  who  has  "no  pity"  and  therefore  deserves 
none. 

David  had  the  faults  of  an  oriental  father,  being 
partial  and  indulgent  beyond  reason.  He  spoiled 
Absalom,  and,  when  he  was  dead,  made  Solomon 
instead  of  Adonijah  his  favorite  and  successor.  The 
rebelHon  of  Absalom  was  one  of  the  consequences,  but 
so  outrageous  was  the  conduct  of  the  son  that  he  marred 
his  own  prospects  and  incurred  the  censure  of  mankind, 
while  the  weakness  of  the  father  was,  and  is,  overlooked 
or  forgiven.^  The  love  of  David  for  his  children  was 
not  altogether  a  virtue.  On  the  other  hand,  what 
could  be  more  touching  and  admirable  than  the  devo- 
tion of  Rizpah,  Saul's  concubine,  who,  when  the  two 
sons  she  bore  the  unhappy  king  and  the  five  of  his 
daughter  Merab  were  executed  to  placate  the  Gibeonites, 
took  her  place  under  the  gibbet  and  sat  there  day  and 
night  the  summer  through  to  prevent  the  birds  of  heaven 
and  the  beasts  of  the  field  from  devouring  their  decaying 
bodies.3 

»  n  Sam.  12:1  ff. 

'  In  the  valley  of  the  Kidron,  east  of  Jerusalem,  there  is  a  monu- 
ment erroneously  called  the  "Tomb  of  Absalom."  The  base  of  it  is 
heaped  with  stones  that  have  been  thrown  at  it  by  passers-by,  who  have 
thus  sought  to  show  their  reprobation  for  a  son  who  dishonored  his 
father. 

J II  Sam.  21:10  f. 


THE  PERIOD  OF  DAVID  AND  SOLOMON         69 

There  is  an  interesting  passage  bearing  on  the  sub- 
ject of  slavery  in  this  period,  namely  II  Sam.  12:31. 
It,  like  8:2,  which  is  late  and  doubtful,  has  been  rendered 
and  interpreted  as  a  description  of  cruelties  inflicted  by 
order  of  David  upon  the  prisoners  taken  at  Rabbah; 
but  the  better  rendering  is  that  ^'he  set  them  at  the 
saws,  and  the  picks,  and  the  axes,  and  made  them  work 
at  the  brick-molds,"  that  is,  reduced  them  to  slavery 
and  employed  them  in  various  forms  of  hard  labor. 
Many,  if  not  most,  of  the  slaves  of  the  time,  owing  to 
the  constant  wars,  were  probably  foreigners. 

It  is  necessary,  in  passing  to  the  social  ethics  of  the 
period,  as  in  preceding  chapters  to  call  attention  to  the 
disregard  for  truth  that  shows  itself  among  all  classes. 
Persons  bent  on  wickedness  naturally  he  and  deceive 
without  compunction:  Amnon,  for  example,  when  he 
was  seeking  his  sister's  ruin;'  Absalom,  when  he  was 
planning  to  avenge  Tamar,*  and  when  he  was  plotting 
the  overthrow  of  his  father;^  and  Zeba,  the  faithless 
steward  of  Meribbaal,  when  he  saw  an  opportunity  to 
rob  his  master."*  Sometimes,  also,  persons  otherwise 
reputable  resorted  to  falsehood  and  deception  when  in 
danger  or  difficulty.  Thus,  the  woman  of  Tekoa 
brought  a  fictitious  complaint  before  David  as  a  mask 
for  a  plea  for  Absalom  ;5  Hushai  made  a  pretense  of 
devotion  to  Absalom  for  the  purpose  of  defeating  him;^ 
Ahimaaz  denied  any  knowledge  of  the  death  of  Absalom 
through  fear  of  the  king;^  and  a  woman  at  Bahurim 

*  II  Sam.  13:6.  s  II  Sam.  14:45. 
»II  Sam.  13:23  ff.  <»II  Sam.  16:16  ff. 
3 II  Sam.  IS :  14.  7  H  Sam.  18: 29. 

*  II  Sam.  16:3. 


/ 


70  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

saved  David's  emissaries  by  giving  their  pursuers  false 
information/  David  himself  was  not  above  such 
practices.  He  Hed  to  Achish  about  his  military  move- 
ments;^ he  also  made  the  king  believe  that  he  was  eager 
to  follow  him  against  Saul;^  but,  worst  of  all,  he  called 
Uriah  home  on  the  pretense  of  wishing  to  hear  from  the 
army/  and,  when  the  honest  fellow,  in  spite  of  the  wine 
with  which  he  was  plied,  refused  to  fall  into  the  trap 
laid  for  him,  sent  him  back  to  Rabbah  with  what 
amounted  to  an  order  for  his  own  execution  ;s  and  all 
this  to  cover  the  crime  that  he  had  committed  against 
his  innocent  victim.  It  was  a  despicable  piece  of 
business,  as  the  prophet  Nathan  saw  and  promptly 
testified;  yet  this  man  David  was  a  very  pattern  of 
faithfulness  to  expressly  accepted  duties  or  obligations. 
His  covenant  with  Jonathan  has  already  been  mentioned. 
He  seems  to  have  regarded  it  as  comprehensive  of  the 
whole  family  of  Saul.  At  any  rate,  during  his  whole 
career  he  treated  all  who  belonged  to  it  with  the  utmost 
kindness  and  consideration.  He  served  Saul  loyally 
while  he  was  at  court,  and  even  in  exile  he  did  not 
forget  that  his  enemy  was  Jonathan's  father  as  well 
as  the  anointed  of  Yahweh.  When  Saul  fell,  and  he 
was  called  to  the  throne,  he  interpreted  the  call  as  a 
divine  commission,  and  acted  accordingly;  but  when 
Ishbaal  was  assassinated  and  the  conspirators  came  to 
David  with  the  news  of  his  death,  expecting  to  be 
praised  and  rewarded  for  what  they  had  done,  the  new 
king  requited  them  with  an  immediate  and  ignominious 
death.^    When  he  had  estabUshed  himself  in  Jerusalem 

'  II  Sam.  17:20.  3l  Sam.  28:2;   29:8.  s  n  Sam.  11:14  f. 

'I  Sam.  27:10.  ^n  Sam.  11:6  ff.  ^11  Sam.  4:95. 


THE  PERIOD  OF  DAVID  AND  SOLOMON  71 

he  made  inquiry  whether  there  were  any  of  Saul's 
family  still  remaining,  and,  when  he  learned  that  there 
was  a  son  of  Jonathan,  a  cripple,  he  sent  for  the  young 
man,  took  him  into  his  own  family,  and  restored  to 
him  the  land  that  had  belonged  to  his  grandfather 
Saul.'  Later,  when  Zeba  reported  Meribbaal  disloyal, 
he  gave  the  property  to  the  informer,  and,  when  he 
discovered  his  mistake,  because  he  had  given  his  word 
to  both,  divided  it  between  them.*  There  is  one 
passage  that,  at  first  sight,  seems  to  contradict  the 
testimony  of  those  already  cited;  namely,  II  Sam. 
2i:8f.,  where  David  is  reported  to  have  delivered 
seven  of  the  grandsons  of  Saul  to  the  Gibeonites  in 
atonement  for  a  breach  of  the  covenant  between  them 
and  Israel.  It  must,  however,  be  remembered  that 
this  action  was  taken  because  there  was  a  famine  in  the 
land,  which,  according  to  the  oracle,  was  "for  Saul, 
and  for  his  bloody  house,  because  he  put  to  death  the 
Gibeonites";  so  that  the  king  could  only  have  saved 
the  unfortunate  young  men  by  disregarding  the  ancient 
law  of  retahation  backed  by  the  alleged  indorsement  of 
Yahweh.  In  this  connection  should  be  mentioned,  also, 
the  fulfilment  by  David  of  his  promise  to  Bathsheba  to 
make  her  son  Solomon  his  heir,^  and  his  attempt  to  show 
his  loyalty  to  Nahash  the  deceased  king  of  Ammon  by 
sending  a  message  of  condolence  to  his  son."*  In  II 
Sam.  8 : 2  he  is  reported  to  have  smitten  Moab,  although 
the  king  of  that  country  had  protected  his  parents  while 
he  was  pursued  by  Saul;^   but  the  passage  in  question 

'  II  Sam.  9: 1  ff.  4 II  Sam.  10: 2  ff. 

"IlSam.  i6:3f.;  19:24!?.  s  I  Sam.  22:3  f. 

3  II  Kings  i:28ff. 


72  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

is  a  Deuteronomic  accretion  of  doubtful  authenticity, 
and  II  Sam.  8:iif.,  where  Moab  is  reckoned  among 
the  kingdoms  subdued  by  David  is  still  later.  The 
truth,  then,  seems  to  be  that  David  spared  Moab,  as 
he  would  have  spared  Ammon,  because  the  king  of  the 
country  had  befriended  him  when  he  was  persecuted.^ 

The  oldest  sources  represent  David  throughout  as 
the  soul  of  good-will.  This  characteristic  explains  why, 
when  he  was  banished  from  court,  the  unfortunate  of 
every  description  flocked  to  him;*  why  his  companions 
in  arms  unhesitatingly  risked  their  lives  to  protect,^  or 
even  to  pleasure  him;'*  and  why,  when  he  fled  before 
Absalom,  his  people  in  great  numbers  accompanied 
him,5  his  foreign  soldiers  refused  to  desert  him,^  and 
Hebrews  and  Gentiles  alike  on  the  east  of  the  Jordan 
came  to  his  assistance. ^ 

The  last  citation  suggests  that  David  was  not  only 
kind  and  generous,  but  rarely  magnanimous.  His 
conduct  toward  Saul  while  the  latter  was  seeking  to 
kill  him  was  above  praise.  It  brought  tears  to  the 
king's  own  eyes,  and  forced  from  him  the  confession, 
"Thou  art  more  righteous  than  I,  for  thou  hast  rendered 

to  me  good,  whereas  I  have  rendered  to  thee  evil 

For,  if  a  man  meet  his  enemy,  will  he  let  him  go 
unharmed?"^    He    overlooked,    at    Abigail's    interces- 

*  Lest  it  should  be  thought  that  II  Sam.  23 :  20  has  been  overlooked, 
note  that  this  passage  is  corrupt,  and  that  the  original  reading  was 
not  "he  slew  two  sons  of  Ariel  of  Moab,"  but  "he  slew  the  two  young 
lions  in  their  lair." 

» I  Sam.  22:2.  «II  Sam.  15:18  fif. 

3 II  Sam.  18:3;  2i:i5ff.  ?  II  Sam.  17:27  ff. 

4 II  Sam.  23 :  13  flf.  *  I  Sam.  24 :  16  ff. 

s  II  Sam.  15:17. 


THE  PERIOD  OF  DAVID  AND  SOLOMON  73 

sion,  the  insolence  of  Nabal/  ignored,  in  spite  of  his 
attendants,  the  vituperation  of  Shimei,^  and  mourned 
for  Absalom  as  tenderly  as  if  the  heartless  young  man 
had  been  the  best  and  most  dutiful  of  sons.^  This 
phase  of  David's  character  would  be  somewhat  marred 
if  I  Kings  2:1-12  were  a  part  of  the  original  story  of 
the  king's  life.  Such,  however,  is  not  the  case.  He 
must  therefore  be  acquitted  of  any  share  in  the  death 
of  Adonijah,  Abiathar,  Joab,  or  Shimei,  and  the  responsi- 
bility for  their  punishment  placed  upon  Solomon,  whom 
the  first  three,  and  possibly  the  last,  also,  would  have 
kept  from  the  throne.^ 

The  spirit  of  David  is  shown  in  the  way  in  which  he 
met  the  advances  of  Abner,  when  the  latter  proposed 
to  reunite  the  tribes,^  and  in  his  attempt  to  put  Amasa, 
who  had  led  Absalom's  troops,  at  the  head  of  a  imited 
army,  for  the  sake  of  bringing  the  men  of  Judah  back 
to  their  allegiance.^  The  same  spirit  manifests  itself 
in  the  laudatory  terms  used  of  Joseph  in  the  so-called 
"Blessing  of  Jacob,"  which  is  supposed  to  have  taken 
substantially  its  present  form  in  the  reign  of  David.'' 
It  was  the  possession  and  exercise  of  this  spirit  that  made 
it  possible  for  the  aged  king  to  return  to  Jerusalem  and 
finally  die  the  recognized  ruler  of  all  Israel. 

It  is  difficult  to  reconcile  these  attractive  and  highly 
commendable  traits  in  David  with  his  military  record 
and  the  slaughter  he  wrought  in  his  operations,  some- 
times showing  no  mercy  even  to  women  and  children. 
Thus,  in  his  forays  into  the  South,  before  he  became 

'ISam.  25:35  £f.        »II  Sam.  16:5  ff.  3  n  Sam.  18:33. 

^  The  Shimei  of  I  Kings  i  :8  is  not  the  one  of  2:8. 
slISam.3:i2.  'II  Sam.  19:13;  20:4  f.      7Gen.49:22ff. 


74  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

king,  he  is  said  to  have  "saved  neither  man  nor  woman 
alive,"'  and  when  he  invaded  Edom  to  have  "cut  off 
every  male."^  It  should,  however,  be  remembered  to 
his  credit  that,  as  appears  from  the  severity  with  which 
he  condemned  Joab  for  avenging  upon  Abner  the  blood 
of  his  reckless  brother^  and  punished  the  shameless 
murderers  of  his  rival  Ishbaal,"*  he  took  no  delight  in 
blood,  and  that  the  wars  in  which  he  engaged  were 
mostly  forced  upon  him  either  by  the  fallen  house  of 
Saul  or  hereditary  foreign  enemies  who  threatened  his 
people  with  slavery  or  extinction.  Joab  is  the  typical 
man  of  blood  of  the  period;  but,  as  already  shown, 
David  had  only  criticism  and  condemnation  for  his 
brutal  methods. 

Thus  far  David  has  been  considered  as  a  popular 
hero,  and  not  as  the  head  of  a  state.  He  was,  in  fact, 
owing  to  the  sad  fate  of  the  son  of  Kish,  the  founder  of 
the  Hebrew  monarchy,  and  for  many  years  bodied  it 
forth  to  the  oriental  world.  It  is  unfortunate  that 
there  is  not  a  more  complete  record  of  his  reign,  showing 
how  he  conducted  the  internal  affairs  of  his  kingdom, 
and  the  result  to  his  admiring  subjects;  but  those  who 
compiled  the  Books  of  Samuel  were  more  interested  in 
other  matters,  and  one  who  desires  such  information 
must  seek  it  in  occasional  incidents  and  the  conditions 
that  they  imply.  There  are  three  or  four  such  incidents 
that  are  very  instructive. 

The  Hebrew  state  was  an  absolute  monarchy,  and 
the  king  had  the  reins  of  government  entirely  in  his  own 
hands.    He  made  laws  and  executed  them.    He  was 

'I  Sam.  27:9.  3lISam.  3:28f. 

?  II  Sam.  8:13  f.;  i  Kings  11:15.  <II  Sam.  4:12, 


THE  PERIOD  OF  DAVID  AND  SOLOMON         75 

also  the  final  authority,  both  on  the  validity  of  the 
laws  and  any  alleged  violation  of  them.  There  was  one 
qualification,  therefore,  that  he  needed  above  all  others, 
the  one  for  which  Solomon  prayed  at  Gibeon,  saying, 
"Give  thy  servant  an  understanding  heart,  to  judge 
thy  people,  that  I  may  discern  between  good  and  evil; 
for  who  is  able  [otherwise]  to  judge  this  thy  great 
people?"'  A  later  writer  (D)  in  II  Sam.  8:15  says  that 
David  "executed  justice  and  righteousness  to  all  his 
people."  A  little  further  study  will  show  whether  this 
estimate  of  him  is  well  founded. 

There  is  a  significant  incident,  the  first  that  will 
be  cited,  in  the  account  of  the  defeat  and  overthrow 
by  David  of  the  Amalekites  who  had  captured  and 
plundered  Ziklag  in  his  absence.*  He  had  six  hundred 
men  with  him  when  he  returned  and  found  the  place 
deserted.  He  at  once  started  in  pursuit,  but  the  pace 
he  set  was  so  rapid  that,  when  he  reached  the  brook 
Besor,  a  third  of  his  men  were  so  nearly  exhausted  that 
they  could  go  no  farther.^  Leaving  them  there,  he 
pushed  forward  with  the  remainder.  He  finally  over- 
took the  marauders,  and  not  only  rescued  the  captives 
and  recovered  the  plunder  taken  at  Ziklag,  but  secured 
additional  spoil  in  great  abundance.  A  part  of  this 
David  reserved  for  himself,  the  rest  being  intended  for 
his  followers.  When,  however,  the  victors  returned 
to  the  brook  Besor,  and  a  distribution  was  proposed, 
some  of  them  objected  to  sharing  their  winnings  with 
the  two  hundred  who  were  there  encamped.  There- 
upon David  intervened.  "Who,"  he  indignantly 
inquired,  "will  hearken  to  you  in  this  matter?  for  as 

^  I  Kings  3:9.  =»  I  Sam.,  chap.  30.  ^  Vss.  9  f. 


76  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

is  his  share  that  went  down  to  the  battle,  so  shall  be 
his  share  that  tarried  by  the  baggage;  they  shall  share 
alike."  This  is  a  remarkable  deliverance,  and  the 
author  adds  to  its  significance  by  saying,  "And  from 
that  day  onward  he  made  it  a  statute  and  an  ordinance 
for  Israel. "  It  means  that  before  he  came  to  the  throne 
David  estabhshed  a  principle  among  his  men  which, 
when  applied  to  civil  affairs,  would  secure  to  every 
loyal  subject  of  his  realm  equality  of  privilege  before 
the  law. 

When  David  finally  succeeded  Saul  he  followed  the 
immemorial  practice  of  oriental  rulers  and  sat  as  judge 
to  hear  and  decide  any  cases  that  might  be  brought 
before  him.  The  impression  that  one  gets  from  II  Sam. 
15:1  ff.  is  that  such  appeals  were  frequent,  and  that 
those  who  brought  them  came  from  all  parts  of  the 
kingdom.  Absalom  is  represented  as  saying  that  there 
was  no  adequate  provision  for  the  administration  of 
justice  at  the  capital;  but  a  son  who  was  plotting  to 
dethrone  his  own  father  can  hardly  be  regarded  as  a 
rehable  witness  to  existing  conditions.  Besides,  there 
is  evidence  that  David  was  approachable  by  the  hum- 
blest suitor.  There  are  two  examples  of  his  method 
and  insight,  which,  although  the  cases  brought  were 
fictitious,  are  as  instructive  as  if  they  had  b^en  genuine. 
The  first  is  the  one  embodied  in  Nathan's  parable.' 
The  prophet  complained  that  a  rich  man  who  had  flocks 
and  herds  very  many,  when  he  wanted  a  lamb  to  set 
before  a  chance  guest,  instead  of  taking  one  of  his  own 
took  a  pet  animal,  and  an  only  one,  belonging  to  a  poor 
neighbor  and  served  it  to  the  stranger.    Hardly  was 

» II  Sam.  12:1  ff. 


THE  PERIOD  OF  DAVID  AND  SOLOMON  77 

the  case  stated  before  the  king,  greatly  enraged,  cried, 
"As  Yahweh  liveth,  the  man  that  hath  done  this  is 
worthy  to  die;  as  for  the  lamb,  he  shall  restore  it  four- 
fold,' because  he  did  this  thing  and  because  he  had  no 
pity."  This,  too,  is  a  remarkable  decision.  The 
prophet  could  not  have  desired  one  more  emphatic  or 
satisfactory.  It  not  only  estabUshes  the  indefeasible 
right  of  property,  but  requires  of  the  rich  such  an 
attitude  toward  the  poor  as  would  eventually  aboHsh 
poverty  in  any  community  in  which  it  was  adopted. 
Solomon  ignored  this  great  principle,  but  it  had  come 
to  stay,  and  it  finally  wrecked  the  arbitrary  and  oppres- 
sive system  that  he  in  his  wisdom  had  elaborated. 

The  other  example^  is  more  compHcated.  It  deals 
with  the  application  of  the  lex  talionis,  the  custom, 
first  alluded  to  in  Gen.  4 :  14,  which  authorized  the  next 
of  kin  to  avenge  the  death  of  a  relative  by  himself 
kilHng  the  slayer.  Joab  took  advantage  of  this  law 
when  he  stabbed  Abner,  who  had  recently,  but  unwill- 
ingly, killed  Asahel,  Joab's  brother,  in  battle.^  The 
grief  and  indignation  of  the  king,  when  he  heard  of  the 
matter,  showed  that  he  had  no  sympathy  with  this 
barbarous  custom.  Joab,  therefore,  must  have  been 
pretty  sure  of  his  case  before  the  woman  from  Tekoa 
presented  it.  She  declared  that  she  had  had  two  sons, 
that  they  had  quarreled,  and  one  of  them  had  killed 
the  other;  and  that  her  relatives  now  demanded  the 
blood  of  the  survivor,  thus  threatening  to  leave  her 
childless  and  her  husband  without  an  heir  to  perpetuate 
his  family.    The  problem  was  a  perplexing  one,  and  the 

*  The  Greek  Version  reads  "fivefold." 

» II  Sam.  14:45.       ♦  3 II  Sam.  2:19  ff. 


78  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

king  at  first  hesitated  to  render  a  decision.  An  Oriental 
does  not  lightly  break  with  custom.  The  woman, 
however,  persisted  and  he  finally  gave  her  his  oath 
that  her  son  should  be  protected.  Later  he  appHed  the 
same  principle,  that  justice  should  not  defeat  its  own 
object,  to  the  case  of  Absalom,  and  ordered  Joab  to 
bring  the  young  man  home  from  exile.' 

These  decisions  are  merely  examples,  but  they  dis- 
play an  insight  and  sympathy  that  led  the  woman  of 
Tekoa  to  compare  David  with  "the  angel  of  God'^  in 
his  ability  "to  discern  good  and  bad,"^  and  that  move 
the  modern  reader  to  only  less  extravagant  admiration. 
Compare  the  famous  judgment  of  Solomon,^  which  is 
not  a  lesson  in  ethics  but  an  experiment  in  psychology. 

The  presence  of  foreigners  in  the  Hebrew  army  has 
more  than  once  in  the  foregoing  discussion  received 
passing  notice.  The  subject  deserves  further  attention. 
The  impression  one  gets  from  reading  the  Hfe  of  Saul 
is  that  he  was  almost  constantly  at  war  with  his  neigh- 
bors. This  is  not  the  case  with  respect  to  David.  He, 
too,  had  some  serious  encounters  with  other  peoples, 
especially  the  Philistines,  but,  when  the  contents  of 
II  Samuel  are  chronologically  arranged,  it  will  be  found 
that  these  all  took  place  early  in  his  reign.-*    He  was 

^11  Sam.  14:21.  » II  Sam.  14:17. 

3 1  Kings,  3: 16  ff.,  a  comparatively  late  passage. 

4  The  order  adopted  by  Budde  for  the  extracts  from  the  Judean 
narrative  is  as  follows:  1:1-4,  n  f.,  17,  i8b,  i8a,  19-27;  2:1-9,  lob, 
i2-23a,  24-32;  3:1,  6b-29,  31-39;  4:1-3,  5-12;  5:1-3,  17-25;  21:15- 
22;  23:8-12,  i7b-22,23b-39,  i3-i7a;  6:1;  5 : 6  (except " thinking  .  .  .  . 
hither"),  7a,  8a,  9-12;  6:2-23;  8:7-19,  i3-i4a;  3:2-5;  5:13-16; 
8:16-18;  24:ib-io,  iib-i2,  13  ("Shall  ....  pestilence  in  thy  land"), 
iia,  13  ("So  ...  .  unto  him"— "now  ....  me"),  14  f.,  16  ("And  .... 


THE  PERIOD  OF  DAVID  AND  SOLOMON  79 

always  on  friendly  terms  with  the  Moabites,  among 
whom  he  left  his  parents  when  their  safety  was  threat- 
ened by  Saul;'  also  with  the  Ammonites,  until  their 
king  provoked  him  to  war,*  and  the  Phoenicians.^ 
Even  with  those  against  whom  he  had  fought  he  after- 
ward established  peaceful  relations.  Thus,  the  king  of 
Geshur  gave  him  his  daughter,  afterward  the  mother 
of  Absalom,  in  marriage^  and  Shobi  of  Ammon  was 
among  those  who  furnished  him  with  suppHes  when  he 
was  fleeing  before  Absalom.^  As  for  the  PhiHstines, 
although,  according  to  all  accounts,  he  fought  and 
subdued  some  or  all  of  them,  he  did  not  disturb  Achish, 
with  whom  he  once  found  refuge  for  more  than  a  year,^ 
for  this  prince  was  still  ruling  in  Gath  when  Solomon 
became  king.''  Moreover,  he  had  many  PhiHstines  in 
his  army,  including  six  hundred  from  Gath  under  a 
certain  Ittai.^  And  they  were  not  mere  mercenaries. 
Said  Ittai,  when  David  would  have  dismissed  him  on 
leaving  Jerusalem,  "Wherever  my  lord  the  king  is, 
whether  for  death  or  for  life,  even  there  also  will  thy 

destroy  it"),  i7,  16  ("Yahweh  ....  Jebusite"),  18-25;  2i:i-2a,  3 
("What  ....  Yahweh"),  4-6,  8,  9  (except  "at  ...  .  harvest"), 
10-14;  9*1-3;  4:4b;  9:4-13;  10;  11:1-20,  2ib-22a,  24a,  22b,  24b- 
27;  i2:i-7a,  9  ("thouhast  ....  Ammon"),  13-31;  13:1-17,  i8b-36, 
37b,  37a,  38b;  14: 1-24,  28-33;  IS '■  1-23,  24  (except  "and  all  the  Levites 
with  him" — "the  covenant  of" — "and  Abiathar  went  up"),  25-37; 
16;  17;  18;  19:1,  3-5,  2,  6-11,  12b,  12a,  13-44;  20:1-22.  See  Sacred 
Books  of  The  Old  Testament,  "Samuel." 

^  I  Sam.  22:3!.  5 II  Sam.  17:27. 

» II  Sam.  10:  iff.  'I  Sam.  27:2  ff. 

3 II  Sam.  5:11.  7  1  Kings  2:29. 

4 II  Sam.  3:3. 

'  See  II  Sam.  15: 18,  where  the  better  reading  is  not  "all  the  Git- 
tites,"  but  "all  the  men  of  Ittai  the  Gittite." 


8o  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

servant  be."^  So  these  foreigners  went  with  the  king 
across  the  Jordan  and  helped  to  win  the  battle  by  which 
he  saved  his  crown.  There  were  others  among  his 
mighty  men,  of  whom  Uriah  the  Gittite,  whom  he 
betrayed,^  Eliphelet  of  Maacah,^  Igal  of  Zobah/  and 
Zelek  the  Ammonite^  are  mentioned  by  name.  All 
these  items  go  to  show  that  neither  David  nor  the 
Hebrews  generally  in  his  time  had  any  appreciable 
prejudice  against  foreigners.  There  is  another  that  is 
even  more  significant,  namely,  that  when  the  accident 
that  prevented  David  from  bringing  the  ark  to  Jerusalem 
on  the  first  attempt  occurred,  he  left  it  on  the  way,  and 
the  man  who  had  the  honor  of  caring  for  it  was  Obed- 
edom,  a  Gittite.^  Now,  nothing  could  have  shocked  a 
later  Hebrew  more  than  such  a  disposition  of  it.  The 
Chronicler  would  not  believe  the  story.  He  therefore 
made  Obed-edom  a  Hebrew  and  bestowed  upon  him 
the  office  of  door-keeper  to  the  sanctuary  of  Yahweh.'^ 
The  Hebrews  of  David's  day,  on  the  other  hand,  had 
no  such  antipathy  to  friendly  foreigners,  but  welcomed 
them,  as  Moses  did  Hobab,  to  the  blessings  that  they 
enjoyed,  or  hoped  to  enjoy,  from  Yahweh.* 

»n  Sam.  15:21.  s  II  Sam.  23:37. 

» II  Sam.  23 :  39.  '  II  Sam.  6 :  10. 

3 II  Sam.  23 : 34.  'I  Chron.  15:18. 

4 II  Sam.  23 :  36.  » II  Sam.  6 :  ii. 


CHAPTER  VII 
THE  FIRST  CENTURY  OF  THE  SEPARATE  KINGDOMS 

On  the  death  of  Solomon  there  was  a  great  upheaval 
the  result  of  which  was  the  separation  of  the  northern 
tribes  from  that  of  Judah.  The  Southern  Kingdom 
was  still  ruled  by  the  house  of  David,  but  the  Northern 
Kingdom  chose  for  its  king  Jeroboam,  son  of  Nebat, 
who  had  served  as  superintendent  of  forced  labor  in 
Ephraim,  but  had  been  suspected  of  disloyalty  by 
Solomon  and  obliged  to  seek  refuge  in  Egypt.  The 
line  of  succession  remained  unbroken  in  Judah,  but  in 
Israel,  as  the  Northern  Kingdom  was  called,  after 
only  twenty-two  years,  the  house  of  Jeroboam  I  was 
overthrown  by  Baasha,  and  in  twenty-six  more  the 
dynasty  founded  by  the  latter  gave  place  to  that  of 
Omri,  which  maintained  itself  until  842  B.C.,  or  the 
close  of  the  period. 

The  rupture  that  gave  rise  to  the  separate  kingdoms 
left  them  both  too  weak  to  cope  with  any  other  at  all 
formidable  power.  Sheshonk  I,  king  of  Egypt  (945- 
924  B.C.),  was  prompt  to  take  advantage  of  this  fact 
to  invade  and  plunder  the  one  after  the  other;  and,  as 
if  this  were  not  enough,  the  resentment  between  them 
more  than  once  brought  them  into  open  hostility  with 
each  other  and  increased  their  wretchedness.  It  was 
only  after  the  overthrow  of  the  house  of  Baasha  that 
Jehoshaphat  of  Judah  ^'made  peace  with  the  king  of 
Israel."  Then,  however,  arose  the  religious  conflict  in 
which  Elijah  and  Elisha  led  the  adherents  of  Yahweh 

81 


82  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

and  finally  succeeded  in  overthrowing  the  dynasty  of 
Omri  and  a  little  later  effecting  almost  as  drastic  reforms 
in  the  kingdom  of  Judah. 

This,  in  outHne,  is  the  poHtico-religious  history  of 
the  period.  It  remains  to  trace  the  line  of  ethical 
development,  if  there  was  any,  while  the  events  men- 
tioned were  occurring.  This  is  not  so  easy  as  might 
be  expected,  the  sources  on  which  one  has  to  depend 
having  been  rewrought  to  such  an  extent  that  it  is 
difficult  to  distinguish  fact  from  legend.  The  legendary 
appears  especially  in  the  stories  of  the  prophets.  The 
clearest  case  is  in  I  Kings,  chap.  13,  where  the  mention 
of  Josiah  by  name  at  least  a  hundred  and  seventy 
years  before  he  was  born,^  and  of  Israel  as  Samaria 
more  than  thirty-five  before  the  city  so  called  was 
founded^  shows  that  the  story  in  its  present  form  is  a 
late  production.  Yet  it  contains  elements  that  must 
have  originated  in  the  period  of  which  it  treats  and  may 
be  used  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  an  idea  of  ethical 
conditions  in  those  earlier  times. 

The  most  prominent  figure  of  the  period  is,  without 
question,  EHjah.  He  enters  unannounced.^  Perhaps 
the  original  account  of  him  had  something  to  say  with 
reference  to  his  parentage  and  earlier  activities,  but  the 
present  text  is  silent  on  the  subject.  He  is  described 
simply  as  coming  from  Tishbe,"*  a  place  somewhere  in 
Gilead.  His  appearance  was  as  impressive  as  it  was 
abrupt.  He  revealed  himself  at  once  in  his  full  stature, 
the  stature  of  a  moral  if  not  a  physical  giant.    He 

^Vs.  2.  ^Vs.  32.  ^I  Kings  17:1. 

^  The  received  text  has  "of  the  sojourners,"  the  result  of  attaching 
the  wrong  vowels  to  the  consonants  of  the  above  name. 


FIRST  CENTURY  OF  SEPARATE  KINGDOMS      S^ 

appeared  at  an  opportune  moment.  The  Hebrew- 
religion  needed  a  champion.  He  evidently  felt  called 
to  this  high  office.  During  his  whole  career  he  never 
failed  to  respond  in  any  emergency.  His  first  duty 
was  a  trial  of  his  courage.  He  seems  to  have  been  a 
peasant,  with  a  figure  whose  xmcouthness  was  empha- 
sized by  the  mantle  of  skins  with  which  he  was  clothed. 
Yet  it  was  his  to  appear  before  a  powerful  king  with  a 
very  unwelcome  message,  and  he  did  so  without  flinch- 
ing. "As  Yahweh  the  God  of  Israel  liveth,  before  whom 
I  stand,"  he  thundered,  "there  shall  not  be  dew  or 
rain  three  years,  except  according  to  my  word,"  then, 
as  suddenly  as  he  came,  he  disappeared. 

His  next  meeting  with  Ahab  was  equally  dramatic. 
The  country  was  suffering  severely  from  drought,  and 
the  king  was  seeking  everywhere  for  water,  at  the  same 
time  making  inquiry  for  the  man  whom  he  held  respon- 
sible for  the  infliction.  Finally  Elijah  appeared  and 
allowed  Obadiah  to  announce  him  to  Ahab.  The  king, 
forgetting  in  his  anger  his  anxiety  for  his  people,  greeted 
him  as  the  "troubler  of  Israel."'  The  prophet,  nothing 
daunted,  not  only  turned  the  reproach  upon  his  assailant, 
but  boldly  challenged  him  and  Jezebel's  prophets  to  a 
test  of  the  rival  claims  of  Baal  and  Yahweh.  The 
details  of  the  contest  may  not  be  historical,  but  there 
can  be  Httle  doubt  that  there  was  a  serious  one  and  that 
Elijah  emerged  from  it  victorious.  Then  he  disappeared 
again,  but  only  to  reappear,  when  Ahab,  at  the  instiga- 
tion of  Jezebel,  had  murdered  Naboth  and  appropriated 
his  vineyard,  to  denounce  the  outrage,  and  predict,  as  a 
penalty,  the  speedy  overthrow  of  the  reigning  dynasty. 

^IKings  i8:i6. 


84  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

This  portrait  of  Elijah  is  an  inspiring  one,  but  there 
are  good  reasons  for  believing  that  it  is  not  greatly 
overdone;  one  of  them  being  that  it  harmonizes  with 
what  is  known  of  the  genuine  prophets  of  Yahweh  from 
the  most  rehable  sources.  There  were  others  in  this 
period  who  were  only  less  admirable.  The  one  whose 
name  first  suggests  itself  is  Elijah's  disciple  and  successor, 
Elisha.  His  character  is  revealed  in  the  reply  he  made 
when  Elijah  gave  him  permission  to  prefer  a  last  request. 
^'I  pray  thee,"  said  he,  "let  a  double  [the  firstborn's] 
portion  of  thy  spirit  be  upon  me."^  It  is  not  necessary 
to  present  in  detail  the  evidence  that  his  prayer  was 
answered.  He  also  stood  before  kings  and  with  no 
less  boldness  than  his  master  declared  "the  whole 
counsel  of  God."^ 

There  is  another  of  like  spirit  who  is  easily  overlooked, 
namely,  Micaiah,  the  son  of  Imlah.  He  it  was  whom 
Ahab  summoned,  when  he  was  trying  to  persuade 
Jehoshaphat  to  join  him  in  an  expedition  against  Ramoth 
Gilead,^  although  he  hated  the  prophet,  because,  as  he 
naively  explained,  he  did  not  prophesy  good  concerning 
him  and  his  kingdom,  but  evil.  When  Micaiah  came 
he  repeated  the  offense,  declaring  that,  if  the  expedition 
were  undertaken,  the  allies  would  be  defeated  and 
scattered. 4  This  incident  is  especially  interesting  and 
instructive  because  the  false  prophets  are  here  intro- 
duced for  the  first  time,  and  the  fearless  honesty  of 
Micaiah  is  contrasted  with  the  timid  servility  of  the 
four  hundred  who,  to  please  AJiab  and  fill  their  own 
bellies,  unanimously  approved  the  enterprise. 

^  11  Kings  2:9.  *  I  Kings  22 :  i  ff. 

»IIKingS3:i3flf.;  6:325.;  Siyff.;  13:7!?.         *I  Kings  22:17. 


FIRST  CENTURY  OF  SEPARATE  KINGDOMS      85 

Such  were  the  more  intimate  characteristics  of  these 
men  of  God.  Others  will  be  mentioned,  each  in  its 
proper  connection. 

There  is  little  to  be  said  on  the  ethics  of  the  family 
as  viewed  in  this  period.  The  position  of  woman  seems 
to  have  been  about  the  same  as  in  earlier  times.  It  was 
always  possible  for  a  peculiarly  gifted  woman  to  free 
herself  to  a  greater  or  less  extent  from  the  trammels  of 
custom  and  prejudice.  This  time  it  is  one  far  different 
in  character  from  Deborah,  namely  Jezebel,  the  Phoeni- 
cian wife  of  Ahab.  There  are  various  indications  that 
the  king  was  a  man  of  ability  and  of  naturally  generous 
impulses.  In  matters  of  religion,  however,  he  seems 
to  have  given  the  queen  a  free  hand.  Thus,  she  was 
allowed  to  cut  off  many  of  the  prophets  of  Yahweh,' 
and  drive  even  Elijah  from  the  country .=*  It  was  she, 
also,  who  managed  the  case  of  Naboth,  and,  acting  in 
the  king's  name,  brought  about  the  stubborn  vintner's 
death.  There  were,  however,  probably  few  women  as 
able  and  influential  as  she  in  her  day,  or  so  cruelly 
fanatical.  There  certainly  is  no  evidence  of  any 
sympathy  with  or  for  her  in  the  sacred  records. 

The  only  other  "great  woman"  who  is  mentioned  is 
the  Shunamite  who  entertained  Elisha  when  he  passed 
through  her  village.  She  also  is  a  commanding  figure, 
but  her  strength  of  character,  in  all  its  manifestations, 
is  so  thoroughly  womanly  that  it  seems  only  manly  in 
her  husband  and  chivalrous  in  the  king  to  further  her 
wishes.^ 

There  are  a  couple  of  passages  that  throw  some  light 
upon  slavery  as  practiced  among  the  Hebrews  of  this 

1 1  Kings  18:4,  13.       » I  Kings  19:2!.        3  n  Kings  4:9  f;  8:1  ff. 


86  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

period  and  their  neighbors.  The  first  is  II  Kings  4:  i  ff., 
where  the  story  is  told  of  a  poor  widow  who  came  to 
EHsha  to  tell  him  that  a  man  whom  she  owed  was  on  the 
point  of  taking  her  two  children  in  payment  of  the  debt. 
The  prophet,  it  is  said,  sympathized  with  her,  but 
instead  of  protesting  against  enslavement  for  debt,  he 
•wrought  a  miracle  to  satisfy  the  creditor;  a  solution 
which  reminds  one  of  Paul's  treatment  of  the  case  of 
Onesimus.'  The  other  passage  is  II  Kings  5:42  £f., 
where  the  interest  of  the  little  Hebrew  maid  in  the 
recovery  of  her  Syrian  master,  Naaman,  indicates  that 
sometimes,  at  least,  the  relation  between  masters  and 
slaves  was  one  of  reciprocal  kindness. 

In  the  field  of  social  ethics  there  is  more  abundant 
and  diversified  material. 

In  the  first  place  there  are  two  interesting  passages 
bearing  on  the  indifference  of  the  Hebrews  to  the  truth. 
There  are  more  cases  of  lying;  for  example,  I  Kings 
20:39  f.,  and  II  Kings  5:20^.  and  8:14;  but  these 
two  are  especially  significant  because  they  might  be 
interpreted  as  justifying  falsehood.  The  first  is  in 
I  Kings,  chap.  13.  The  story  here  told  says  that  a 
prophet  was  sent  from  Judah  to  curse  the  altar  at 
Bethel,  being  instructed  not  to  eat  or  drink  in  the  place. 
He  therefore  declined  an  invitation  from  the  king;  but 
when  a  resident  prophet  professed  to  have  received  a 
message  revoking  these  instructions,  he  allowed  himself 
to  be  deceived,  whereupon  his  deceiver  sentenced  him 
to  death  for  disobedience  of  Yahweh.  This  story 
shocks  the  modern  reader.  He  cannot  conceive  of  one 
prophet  as  tempting  another  to  his  death.   The  Hebrews, 

»  Philem.  vss.  10  ff . 


FIRST  CENTURY  OF  SEPARATE  KINGDOMS      87 

however,  could.  They  did  not,  it  will  be  remembered, 
attribute  actual  guilt  to  the  serpent  for  tempting  Eve/ 
Indeed,  they  went  farther  and  represented  Yahweh 
himself  as  sometimes  authorizing  falsehood.  This  is 
perfectly  clear  from  the  second  illustration.  It  is  in 
the  story  of  Micaiah  already  cited.^  This  prophet, 
in  explaining  the  unanimity  of  his  opponents,  said  that 
they  approved  the  expedition  to  Ramoth  Gilead  because 
Yahweh  had  put  "a  lying  spirit"  into  all  their  mouths, 
that  they  might  "entice"  the  king  to  his  destruction. 
The  idea  seems  to  have  been  that  it  was  not  immoral 
to  misrepresent  things  so  long  as  the  tempter  used 
only  his  wits  and  the  tempted  remained  free  in  his 
choice  of  action;  which  was  the  Hebrew  way  of  say- 
ing that  temptation  might  explain,  but  did  not  excuse, 
wrong-doing. 

This  was  the  ancient  and  popular  view,  but  it  does 
not  seem  to  have  been  the  teaching  of  Elijah  and  Elisha. 
Indeed,  one  may  fairly  say  that  the  latter  condemned 
lying  when  he  rebuked  and  severely  punished  his 
servant  Gehazi  for  obtaining  money  and  other  valuables 
from  Naaman  under  false  pretenses.^  At  any  rate, 
from  this  time  onward  the  truth  is  treated  with  increas- 
ing reverence.  A  false  oath,  as  has  been  shown,  was 
always  abhorrent  to  the  Hebrews.  It  is  therefore  not 
strange  to  find  the  witnesses  against  Naboth  charac- 
terized as  "base  fellows"  and  creatures  of  the  infamous 
Jezebel.^ 

At  this  point  attention  should  be  called  to  a  phase  of 
the  struggle  in  which  Elijah  and  Elisha  were  engaged. 

*  Gen.,  chap.  3.  3 II  Kings  5 :  24  ff. 

'  I  Kings,  chap.  22.  *  I  Kings  21:9!. 


88  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

The  struggle  itself  was  only  a  continuation  of  the 
irrepressible  conflict  between  Yahwism  and  other 
religions.  It  had  been  acute  in  the  time  of  Saul,  when 
the  enemies  of  the  God  of  the  Hebrews  were  an  ahen 
race,  the  Phihstines.  It  was  renewed  with  equal 
virulence  when  Ahab  took  to  wife  the  Phoenician 
princess  Jezebel  and  permitted  her  to  practice  and 
propagate  the  worship  of  Baal  among  his  people.  The 
struggle  thus  became  an  internal  one,  with  Hebrews 
in  both  parties. 

There  was  another  difference,  namely,  that,  whereas 
in  the  days  of  Saul  the  Hebrews  admitted  the  reality 
of  other  divinities  than  Yahweh,  and  the  legitimacy  of 
the  worship  of  these  gods  by  other  peoples,  Elijah  at 
Carmel  issued  the  challenge,  ''How  long  will  ye  go 
limping  between  divided  opinions?  if  Yahweh  be  God, 
follow  him;  but  if  Baal,  follow  him."  In  other  words 
he  brought  home  to  his  people  most  forcibly  the  question 
whether  there  was  any  other  God  than  Yahweh.  He, 
of  course,  took  the  negative,  and  the  assembled  multi- 
tude in  the  end  indorsed  his  contention,  shouting, 
"Yahweh,  he  is  God;  Yahweh,  he  is  God.'"  At  the 
same  time,  since  Ehjah  was  careful  to  identify  this  the 
true  and  only  God  with  the  God  of  the  patriarchsj^* 
they  realized  that  the  declaration  they  had  made  was 
nothing  short  of  a  renewal  of  the  covenant  with  their 
fathers.  Thus,  the  reUgious  movement  headed  by 
Elijah  acquired  an  ethical  character,  which  was  imparted 
to  the  zeal,  sometimes  more  neurotic  than  either  moral 
or  religious,  of  the  rank  and  file  of  the  prophets  who 
called  themselves  by  the  name  of  Yahweh.     The  story 

'  I  Kings  18:21,  39.  '  I  Kings  18:36. 


FIRST  CENTURY  OF  SEPARATE  KINGDOMS      89 

of  Micaiah  shows  how  imperfectly  they  represented  the 
God  whose  champions  they  professed  to  be.  Still,  it 
was  to  their  credit  that  they  were  loyal  to  the  national 
deity  as  compared  with  those  who,  forgetting  the 
covenant  with  the  fathers,  either  deserted  him  entirely 
or  attempted  to  serve  both  him  and  Baal. 

In  a  preceding  chapter  stress  was  laid  on  the  principle 
enunciated  by  David  in  the  case  brought  before  him  by 
the  prophet  Nathan,  but  the  breadth  of  its  application 
was  only  vaguely  suggested.  David,  in  whom  generosity 
was  a  prominent  characteristic,  seems  generally  to  have 
recognized  it.  Solomon,  on  the  other  hand,  as  already 
intimated,  ignored  it.  He  greatly  enlarged  and  beauti- 
fied his  capitaP  and  maintained  a  luxurious  and  extrava- 
gant court,*  but,  in  order  to  meet  the  expense  of  these 
developments,  he  was  obliged  to  introduce  systematic 
and  onerous  taxation,  and  even  employ  forced  labor.^ 
He  was  able,  sometimes  by  the  use  of  arbitrary  means, 
to  enforce  this  policy  during  his  lifetime,  but  the  people 
were  restive  under  it,  and,  when  he  finally  died,  they 
lost  no  time  in  giving  unmistakable  expression  to  their 
dissatisfaction/  They  did  so  in  the  assembly  called 
to  ratify  the  accession  of  Rehoboam  at  Shechem.  At 
the  same  time  they  asked  Rehoboam  to  make  the 
"grievous  service"  they  had  done  under  his  father 
somewhat  "lighter."  This  was  a  very  modest  demand, 
as  the  king's  aged  advisers  told  him,  but  he  rejected 
their  advice  and  followed  that  of  the  reckless  com- 
panions of  his  youth.  "My  little  finger,"  replied  the 
heartless  young  braggart,  "is  thicker  than  my  father's 

^  I  Kings  6 :  15  ff.  3 1  Kings  5 :  13  f. 

"I  Kings  5:22  f.,  26.  4 1  Kings  12:4. 


go  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

loins/  My  father  made  your  yoke  heavy,  but  I  will 
add  to  your  yoke:  my  father  chastened  you  with  whips, 
but  I  will  chastise  you  with  scorpions."  Then  arose 
the  old  cry  of  the  northern  tribesmen,  "To  your  tents, 
O  Israel,"^  and,  as  soon  as  a  separate  assembly  could 
be  called,  Jeroboam,  who  had  been  a  thorn  in  the  flesh 
to  Solomon,  was  chosen  "king  over  all  Israel. "^ 

The  revolt  of  the  northern  tribes  was  a  protest  against 
the  abuse  of  royal  authority.  Since  Jeroboam  was 
chosen  as  its  head,  he  must  have  sympathized  with  the 
principle  involved  and  must  have  given  his  followers 
reason  to  believe  that  he  would  not  disregard  it.  The 
length  of  his  reign  favors  the  supposition  that  he  did 
not  disappoint  them.  To  be  sure,  later  authorities 
accuse  him  of  falhng  short  of  the  standard  set  by  David, 
but  it  will  be  found  that  the  specific  charges  against 
him  relate  only  to  his  attitude  toward  the  worship  of 
Yahweh,  especially  as  practiced  at  Jerusalem,  and  not 
to  his  treatment  of  his  subjects.  The  same  is  true  in 
the  cases  of  the  other  northern  kings  except  Ahab. 
He  is  not  only  accused  by  a  late  writer  of  having  done 
"more  to  provoke  Yahweh,  the  Gk)d  of  Israel,  than  all 
the  kings  of  Israel  that  were  before  him,"  but  by  an 
earHer,  in  the  story  to  which  reference  has  twice  already 
been  made,  of  having  violated  the  most  sacred  rights 
of  an  innocent  subject.  This  incident,  however,  must 
not  be  misinterpreted.  It  is  not  the  murder  of  Naboth 
that  is  significant  in  this  connection,  but  the  attitude 

*  These  words  appear  only  in  I  Kings  12:10,  but  they  should  evi- 
dently be  repeated  in  vs.  14.  According  to  H.  P.  Smith,  Old  Testament 
History,  1 78,  they  were  all  that  the  king  used,  the  rest  being  editorial. 

»II  Sam.  20:1.  3  1  Kings  12:16,  18  ff. 


FIRST  CENTURY  OF  SEPARATE  KINGDOMS      91 

of  Ahab  and  others  to  the  deed.  In  the  first  place,  it 
was  not  done  by  Ahab  or  at  his  suggestion,  but  by  his 
wife,  because,  much  as  he  wanted  the  vineyard,  he  had 
scruples  about  taking  it  by  force/  Secondly,  no  sooner 
was  the  death  of  Naboth  known  than  Elijah  appeared 
on  the  scene  and  as  boldly  and  severely  arraigned 
him  as  Nathan  did  David,  and  with  a  similar  result.^ 
Thirdly,  it  is  evident  that  this  crime  aroused  intense 
popular  indignation,  and  that  the  revolution  which 
speedily  followed  was  hastened,  if  not  occasioned,  by  it.^ 
These  facts  show  that  in  the  reign  of  Ahab  there  was  no 
lack  of  healthy  moral  reaction  in  Israel  when  the  rights 
of  the  individual  were  seriously  violated. 

In  the  story  of  Naboth  Elijah  appears  in  the  r61e 
of  judge  or  censor.  There  are  other  passages  more  or 
less  legendary  in  which  both  he  and  Elisha  are  repre- 
sented as  acting  in  a  manner  that  the  modern  reader 
cannot  but  condemn  as  cruel;'*  yet  the  general  impres- 
sion one  gets  from  reading  the  traditions  with  reference 
to  them  is  that  they  were  not  only  ardent  patriots, 
seeking  the  best  interests  of  their  people  as  a  whole, 
but  centers  of  beneficence  to  those,  especially  the  unfor- 
tunate, with  whom  they  came  into  personal  contact.^ 

The  question  concerning  the  attitude  of  the  Hebrews 
toward  strangers  and  foreigners  in  this  period  is  some- 
what complicated.  The  almost  constant  strife  between 
the  kingdoms  of  Israel  and  Syria  would  naturally  induce 
latent  hostiHty  toward  foreigners  of  all  nations.  It  did 
not,  however,  at  first  seriously  disturb  the  hitherto 

^  I  Kings  21:4.  3 II  Kings  9 :  23  f .,  35  f . 

'I  Kings  21:27  jBf.  ^11  Kings  1:9  f.;  2:2$  i. 

si  Kings  i7:8£f.;  2  Kings  2:195.;  4:1  ff.  ,etc. 


92  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

friendly  relations  between  the  Hebrews  of  both  kingdoms 
and  the  Phoenicians.  Indeed,  the  marriage  of  Ahab 
to  a  daughter  of  the  king  of  the  Sidonians,'  and  of 
Jehoram  of  Judah  to  her  daughter,*  indicates  that  the 
two  peoples  were  never  more  intimate.  It  is  one  thing, 
however,  to  tolerate  a  neighbor  on  his  own  ground  and 
quite  another  to  admit  him  to  a  position  of  influence 
and  authority  among  one's  own  people.  At  any  rate, 
the  prophets  Elijah  and  Ehsha  were  hostile  to  Jezebel, 
because  she  did  not  obey  the  injunction  to  forget  her 
own  people  and  her  father's  house,^  but  brought  her 
religion  with  her  to  plague  the  worshipers  of  Yahweh; 
and  there  is  evidence  that  the  revolution  under  Jehu 
was  a  reHgious  as  well  as  a  political  movement.  This 
is  perfectly  clear  from  the  facts,  that  as  soon  as  the 
impetuous  soldier  had  removed  Joram  and  his  mother, 
he  proceeded  to  extirpate  Baalism  at  Samaria,  and 
that,  on  his  way  thither,  he  was  joined  by  Jehonadab, 
the  son  of  Rechab,  who  represented  the  most  fanatical 
of  the  worshipers  of  Yahweh.^  Note,  also,  that  it  was 
the  priests,  with  the  assistance,  it  is  true,  of  the  foreign 
guard,  who  afterward  deposed  Athaliah  and  placed  her 
grandson  on  the  throne  of  Judah.^  In  the  former  case 
the  revolution  was  attended  with  so  much  bloodshed 
that  the  zeal  of  the  participants  is  more  than  offset  by 
their  cruelty.^ 

1 1  Kings  16:31.  =»II  Kings  8:18. 

3  See  Ps.  45 :  10,  which  has  by  some  exegetes  been  supposed  to  refer 
to  Jezebel. 

4 II  Kings  10:15  £E.;  Jer.  35:6£f. 

5II  Kings  11:4  ff.  ''IIKings  io:i8ff. 


CHAPTER  VIII 
AMOS  AND  HIS  TIMES 

The  revolution  in  Israel  in  843  B.C.  had  its  echo  in 
Judah,  but,  for  the  time  being,  the  party  favorable  to 
foreigners,  and  their  ideas  and  practices,  triumphed; 
for  no  sooner  did  Athaliah,  the  mother  of  Ahaziah  the 
king,  hear  that  he  as  well  as  Jehoram  had  died  by  the 
hand  of  Jehu  than,  with  a  cruel  energy  worthy  of  her 
mother  Jezebel,  she  ''destroyed  all  the  seed  royal''  on 
whom  she  could  lay  her  hands  and  herself  took  posses- 
sion of  the  government;  and  it  was  only  after  six  years 
that  it  was  possible  to  dethrone  her.  Then  there  was  a 
counter  revolution  as  the  result  of  which  Joash,  the 
only  surviving  son  of  Ahaziah,  came  into  his  inheritance. 
From  that  time  the  succession  was  undisturbed  in  Judah, 
the  kings  of  this  period  being  only  three  in  number, 
Joash,  Amasiah,  and  Uzziah.  Meanwhile  the  kings  of 
Israel,  all  of  whom  belonged  to  the  same  dynasty,  were 
Jehu  himself,  Jehoahaz,  Jehoash,  and  Jeroboam  11. 

In  the  earlier  part  of  the  period  the  northern  tribes 
continued  their  struggle  with  the  Syrians,  with  varying 
fortunes.  At  one  time,  when  Shalmaneser  II,  to  whom 
Jehu  was  paying  tribute,  was  occupied  elsewhere,  the 
Syrian  usurper  Hazael  was  able,  not  only  to  ravage 
the  country  east  of  the  Jordan,  but  to  force  his  way  down 
the  coast  of  the  Mediterranean  and  threaten  Jerusalem.^ 
Finally,  however,  the  Assyrians  under  Ramman-nirari 
III  reappeared  and  made  the  Syrians,  as  well  as  their 

^11  Kings  10:32  f.;   12:17!.;  Amos  1:3. 
93 


94  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

neighbors,  tributary.  From  this  time  onward  Israel, 
first  under  Jehoash,  and  then  under  Jeroboam  II, 
prospered,  until  they  could  boast  that  they  had  recovered 
all  that  they  had  previously  lost.'  Meanwhile  Amasiah 
of  Judah  had  reconquered  Edom,""  and  then,  on  account 
of  an  unsuccessful  war  with  Jehoash,  abdicated  in 
favor  of  his  wiser  and  more  fortunate  son  Uzziah.^ 
Thus,  at  the  end  of  the  period  both  kingdoms  were  in  a 
more  prosperous  condition  than  they  had  been  since 
they  became  separate. 

There  is  very  little  in  the  Books  of  Kings  that  is  of 
importance  in  this  connection,  the  compiler  having 
evidently  taken  greater  interest  in  the  poHtical  and 
strictly  religious,  than  in  the  ethical,  history  of  his 
people.  Fortunately,  however,  there  is  another  source, 
the  Book  of  Amos,  in  which  a  contemporary  has  left  a 
speaking  record  of  the  moral  condition  of  the  Northern 
Kingdom,  and  his  own  efforts  to  improve  it  about 
760  B.C. 

The  importance  of  Amos  in  any  discussion  of  the 
ethics  of  the  Old  Testament  is  universally  recognized. 
He  not  only  teaches  morahty  and  condemns  its  opposite, 
but  insists  that  one  cannot  please  Yahweh  without 
observing  the  ethical  requirements  growing  out  of  man's 
nature  and  environment.  This  is  more  or  less  clearly 
put  in  several  passages.  In  one  of  these''  he  makes 
very  effective  use  of  irony.  "Come,"  he  says,  "to 
Bethel — to  transgress!  At  Gilgal — ^multiply  trans- 
gression! Yea;  bring  your  sacrifices  every  morning, 
your  tithes  every  three  days;  and  burn  a  thank-offering 

^  n  Kings  14: 25.  »  n  Kings  14: 17. 

» II  Kings  14:7.  '♦  Amos  4:4!. 


AMOS  AND  HIS  TIMES  95 

of  unleavened  bread,  and  proclaim,  publish,  free-will 
offerings;  for  thus  ye  love  to  do,  children  of  Israel, 
saith  the  Lord  Yahweh."  It  is  clear  that  the  prophet 
here  means  to  say  that  the  zeal  of  Israel  in  making  the 
round  of  the  popular  sanctuaries  and  presenting  there 
their  tithes  and  sacrifices  was  not  only  useless  as  a 
religious  practice,  but  positively  offensive  to  the  Deity. 
The  same  thought  is  even  more  forcibly  expressed  in 
5 :  21  ff.,  where,  after  asserting  the  worthlessness  of  feasts 
and  offerings,  he  gives  his  own  idea  of  reHgion.  Speak- 
ing for  Yahweh,  he  says,  "I  hate,  I  despise,  your  feasts, 
and  I  take  no  dehght  in  your  festivals.  For,  when  ye 
offer  to  me  your  burnt  offerings  and  vegetable  offerings, 
I  am  not  pleased,  and  I  regard  not  the  fatlings,  your 
peace  offerings.  Away  from  me  with  the  noise  of  thy 
songs,  and  let  me  not  hear  the  sound  of  thy  psalteries; 
but  let  justice  roll  Hke  water,  and  righteousness  like  a 
living  stream."  Then  he  adds  an  argument  precisely 
parallel  to  that  used  by  Paul  in  Rom.  4:ioff.:  "Did 
ye  bring  to  me  sacrifices  in  the  desert  forty  years, 
house  of  Israel  ?"  The  question,  of  course,  is  equivalent 
to  a  denial  that  the  Hebrews  observed  such  rites  during 
the  Exodus,  and  by  implication  that,  as  popularly 
beheved,  they  were  an  essential  element  in  religion. 
His  own  conviction  is  expressed  in  the  exhortation  he 
here  inserts,  "Let  justice,"  etc.,  but  he  puts  it  more 
broadly  when  he  complains  that  they  to  whom  he  was 
sent  "know  not  how  to  do  right,"'  and  again  when  he 
exhorts  them  to  "hate  evil  and  love  good,"  with  the 
hope  that  Yahweh  may  yet  be  "gracious  to  a  remnant" 
of  their  number. 
^  Amos  3 :  lo. 


96  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

Amos  in  his  day  had  occasion  to  dwell  on  the  subject 
of  personal  morahty.  It  was,  as  has  been  noted,  a  time 
of  prosperity  for  the  Hebrews,  especially  of  the  Northern 
Kingdom.  Jeroboam  II,  who  was  then  king,  had 
warred  successfully,  and  in  this  and  other  ways  added 
greatly  to  the  wealth  of  his  people;  and  wealth  had 
brought  with  it  the  train  of  vices  by  which  it  is  usually 
accompanied.  These  the  prophet  by  turns  condemns 
or  ridicules.  He  was  offended  by  the  idle  luxury  that 
prevailed,  pronouncing  a  woe  upon  those  "who  He  on 
ivory  couches,  yea,  stretched  upon  their  divans,  eating 
lambs  from  the  flock,  and  calves  from  the  midst  of  the 
stall;  who  twitter  to  the  note  of  the  psaltery,  think 
that  for  them,  as  for  David,  are  instruments  of  music; 
who  drink  wine  from  basins,  and  anoint  themselves 
with  the  choicest  of  oils,  but  are  not  grieved  for  the 
affiction  of  Joseph."'  He  accuses  these  voluptuaries 
of  making  their  reHgious  observances  occasions  for 
drunkenness.*  He  finds  the  women  guilty  of  equally 
objectionable  excesses.  He  calls  them  kine  of  Bashan, 
and  describes  them  as  calling  on  their  cruel  and  oppres- 
sive husbands  to  furnish  their  feasts  from  the  proceeds 
of  extortion. 3  Finally,  he  charges  that  these  wine- 
bibbers,  not  content  with  degrading  themselves,  cor- 
rupt the  nazirites  by  persuading  them  to  break  their 
vow  of  abstinence. "*  The  last  citation  does  not  prove 
that  Amos  himself  was  an  ascetic,  but  it  is  pretty  clear 
from  them  all,  taken  in  connection  with  the  general 
tone  of  the  book,  that  he  condemned  any  form  of  excess. 
It  is  not  surprising,  therefore,  to  find  in  his  indictment 

^  Amos  6:3  ff;  also  3: 15.  «  Amos  4:1. 

*  Amos  2:8.  <  Amos  2:12. 


AMOS  AND  HIS  TIMES  97 

of  Israel  the  charge  that  "a  man  and  his  father  go  unto 
the  maiden,"  that  is,  that  the  men  of  Israel,  young  and 
old,  practiced  impurity/  "The  maiden"  is  here,  no 
doubt,  the  religious  prostitute  of  the  Canaanite  shrine, 
but  from  the  context  it  is  evident  that  Amos  meant  to 
teach  that  lust  in  itself,  like  intemperance,  was  offensive 
to  Yahweh. 

The  prophet  says  little  that  can  be  interpreted  as 
applying  to  the  family.  Perhaps,  however,  the  charges 
against  the  Philistines*  should  be  cited  in  this  connec- 
tion. Hitherto  slavery  has  been  recognized  as  an 
existing  institution  and  tacitly  permitted;  but  here 
Gaza  is  severely  condemned  for  leading  captive  a  whole 
population,^  and  the  case  of  Moab"*  warrants  the  belief 
that  the  prophet  would  have  been  equally  severe  if  the 
people  enslaved  had  not  been  Hebrews. 

In  the  field  of  social  ethics,  as  will  appear,  Amos 
marks  a  distinct  advance.  One  wishes  that  he  had 
expressed  himself  on  the  subject  of  falsehood.  If  he 
had,  he  would  hardly  have  condoned  it  as  did  the  earlier 
Hebrews. 

He  expresses  himself  clearly  and  strongly  on  the 
kindred  subject  of  honesty  in  business.^  The  Hebrews 
of  his  time,  it  seems,  at  least  in  Israel,  had  the  same 
faults  as  tradesmen  that  are  now  common  in  the 
Orient.  He  describes  them  as  adepts  in  the  famiHar 
tricks  for  cheating  unwary  customers,  selHng  light 
grain,  measured  in  a  scant  ephah,  at  an  unjust  price, 

^  Amos  2:6.  '  Amos  i :  6. 

3  In  vss.  19  f .  a  similar  charge  is  brought  against  Tyre,  but  the 
genuineness  of  this  passage  is  questioned. 

4  Amos  2:1  ff.  s  Amos  8:5  ff. 


98  THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

weighed  in  false  balances.  Such  rascahty,  he  tells 
them  plainly,  cannot  but  bring  upon  them  the  direst 
calamities  and  final  destruction  as  a  nation. 

The  quality  on  which  Amos  lays  most  stress  is 
justice.  The  wealth  of  the  rich  in  Israel  was  evidently 
not  all  gained  in  war  or  legitimate  business.  Nor  did 
those  who  were  in  pursuit  of  gain  confine  themselves 
to  the  devices  of  tricky  tradesmen.  They  employed 
other  means  which  the  discourses  of  Amos  are  largely 
devoted  to  exposing  and  denouncing.  In  the  indict- 
ment already  partially  quoted  he  charges  that  "they 
sell  for  money  the  guiltless,  and  the  needy  for  a  pair 
of  shoes";  that  is,  as  magistrates  they  condemn  an 
innocent  man  for  as  little  as  would  buy  a  pair  of  shoes. 
Further,  he  says,  **the  wine  of  such  as  have  been  fined 
they  drink,"  spend  the  money  collected  from  persons 
unjustly  fined  for  the  wine  they  drink  in  their  orgies.^ 
In  2 : 9  f .  the  Philistines  and  the  Egyptians  are  simimoned 
to  witness  the  oppression  rampant  in  Samaria  by  which 
its  nobles  have  filled  their  palaces.  In  5 :  lo  the  prophet 
inveighs  against  those  who  "take  a  present  of  grain 
from  the  lowly,"  and  in  vs.  12  he  calls  the  same  persons 
"takers  of  bribes,"  who  thrust  the  needy  aside  in  the 
gate  and  refuse  to  hear  their  complaints.  Indeed, 
according  to  Amos,  there  was  no  such  thing  as  justice 
in  Israel  in  his  day,  and  any  attempt  to  secure  it  always 
brought  disappointment,  and  sometimes  more  serious 
consequences. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  prophet  believed  in  the 
justice  of  Yahweh  and,  in  the  name  of  the  national 
God,  demanded  that  the  abuses  of  which  he  complained 

^  Amos  1 : 6,  8. 


AMOS  AND  HIS  TIMES  99 

should  cease.  This  demand  is  more  than  once  repeated. 
"Hate  evil  and  love  good,"  he  pleads/  and  again,' 
"let  justice  roll  like  water,  and  righteousness  like  a 
living  stream."  Then  he  threatens  them  with  the 
wrath  of  Yahweh,  assuring  them  that  omnipotence  is 
pledged  against  them,  and  that  therefore  it  is  folly  for 
them  to  dream  of  escaping  punishment.  "Can  horses 
run  on  a  cliff?  or  can  one  plow  the  sea  with  oxen?" 
he  asks,  meaning  that,  if  these  things  were  possible, 
Israel  might  with  impunity  turn  "justice  to  gall,  and 
the  fruit  of  righteousness  to  wormwood." 

The  phrase,  "the  day  of  Yahweh,"  'first  appears  in 
the  Book  of  Amos.  Not  that  it  was  original  with  him. 
Indeed,  it  is  clear  from  the  way  in  which  he  uses  it 
that  it  was  not.  It  seems  to  have  been  a  familiar 
expression  to  denote  the  time  when,  in  the  future, 
Yahweh  would  reveal  himself  to  right  the  wrongs  of 
his  people.  The  Hebrews,  therefore,  naturally  longed 
for  it,  and  the  more  as  their  troubles  multiplied.  Amos 
gives  it  a  new  interpretation.  His  idea  is  that,  if 
Israel  loved  good  and  hated  evil,  they  would  be  justified 
in  their  expectations,  but  since  they  themselves  have 
offended  a  righteous  God,  they  have  no  right  to  expect 
from  him  anything  but  adverse  judgment.  "Why 
then,"  he  asks,  "would  ye  have  the  day  of  Yahweh  ?  It 
is  darkness,  and  not  light;  as  if  a  man  were  fleeing  from 
a  lion,  and  a  bear  should  meet  him,  and,  when  he  came 
home  and  rested  his  hand  against  the  wall,  a  serpent 
should  bite  him.  Is  not  the  day  of  Yahweh  darkness 
rather  than  light,  yea,  gloomy  without  any  brightness  ?"3 
The  importance  of  this  declaration  can  hardly  be  over- 

^  Amos  5:15.  'Amos  5 124.  3Amos5:i8ff. 


lOO       THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

estimated.  It  swept  away  the  flimsy  error  behind 
which  those  for  whom  it  was  made  had  taken  refuge 
and  brought  them  face  to  face  with  the  dread  alter- 
natives of  the  moral  law.^ 

Two  or  three  times  in  this  chapter  it  has  been  neces- 
sary for  the  sake  of  completeness  to  refer  to  utterances 
of  Amos  concerning  foreign  peoples,  but  no  attempt  has 
been  made  to  define  his  attitude  toward  them.  The 
point  is  one  on  which  it  is  only  necessary  to  consult  his 
discourses.  He  believed,  as  did  all  the  Hebrews  of  his 
day,  that  his  people  had  received  remarkable  tokens 
of  the  divine  favor.  In  2:95.  he  emmierates  some  of 
them:  Yahweh  had  brought  them  out  of  Egypt,  led 
them  through  the  desert,  given  them  the  land  of  the 
Amorites,  and  provided  them  with  prophets  and  nazi- 
rites  as  teachers  and  exemplars  of  righteousness.  Indeed, 
he  admits  that  the  relation  between  their  God  and  them 
was  in  some  respects  unique,  making  the  former  say  to 
the  latter  in  3 :  i,  "You  only  have  I  known  [chosen]  of  all 
the  families  of  the  earth."  He  does  not,  however, 
claim  or  allow  that  Yahweh  is  the  God  of  the  Hebrews 
alone.  Indeed,  the  choice  alleged  implies  power  over 
the  other  peoples.  It  is  more  clearly  implied  in  6:14, 
where  Amos  threatens  Israel  with  subjugation  by  the 
Assyrians,  who  are  thus  made  the  creatures  and  instru- 
ments of  Yahweh.  Finally  he  distinctly  teaches  the 
universal  sovereignty  of  his  God  when,  in  reply  to  the 
current  doctrine,  he  says,^  "Are  ye  not  Uke  the  children 

^  There  are  two  passages  in  chap.  9,  the  last  in  vss.  8  and  9,  which 
are  less  stem  in  character,  but  they,  like  vss.  11-15,  a^re  additions  to 
the  original  text,  and  therefore  have  no  bearing  in  this  connection. 

'Amos  9:7. 


AMOS  AND  HIS  TIMES  ioi 

of  Cush  unto  me,  children  of  Israel,  saith  Yahweh? 
If  I  brought  Israel  up  from  the  land  of  Egypt,  did  I 
not  also  bring  the  Philistines  from  Caphtor  and  the 
Syrians  from  Kir  ?''  In  the  light  of  these  passages  it  is 
not  strange  that  Amos  represents  Yahweh  as  arraigning 
the  surrounding  peoples,  as  well  as  Israel,  for  inhumanity, 
whether  toward  one  another  or  the  Hebrews.  He  would 
doubtless  have  condemned  these  latter  for  similar 
treatment  of  foreigners,  if  there  had  been  occasion  for 
so  doing.  See  also  3:9,  already  once  cited,  where  he 
summons  the  PhiUstines  and  the  Egyptians  as  a  jury 
in  the  case  of  the  noisy  oppressors  of  Samaria. 


CHAPTER  IX 

THE  EPHRAIMITE  SOURCE 
I.      THE  EPHRAIMITE   STORY  OF  THE  PATRIARCHS 

The  Ephraimite,  or  Elohistic,  narrative  is  supposed 
to  have  been  written  not  far  from  the  date  of  the  prophe- 
cies of  Amos,  perhaps  about  750  B.C.  It  seems  to  have 
begun  with  the  migration  of  Abraham  and  to  have 
followed  the  history  of  the  Hebrews  at  least  as  far  as 
the  reign  of  David.  The  extracts  from  it  cannot  always 
be  distinguished  from  passages  on  the  same  subjects 
from  the  earlier  Judean  work,  but  they  generally  betray 
their  origin  by  pretty  well-marked  characteristics. 
Two  of  these  criteria  may  be  mentioned  in  this  connec- 
tion. In  the  first  place,  since,  as  the  term  Ephraimite 
implies,  this  narrative  had  its  origin  in  the  Northern 
Kingdom,  it  now  and  then  betrays  a  partiality  for  that 
region,  its  people,  its  history,  and  its  interests,  as  com- 
pared with  Judah.  Secondly,  since  its  author  (or 
authors)  lived  and  wrote  after  Amos  as  well  as  Elijah 
and  EHsha,  he  takes  a  didactic  or  apologetic  tone  that 
was  foreign  to  the  nature  and  purpose  of  the  earlier 
writer,  and  when,  as  is  sometimes  the  case,  he  cannot 
accept  the  testimony  of  tradition,  he  takes  such  liberties 
with  his  data  as  will  make  them  better  serve  the  purpose 
of  edification.  His  work,  therefore,  has  less  value  than 
the  Judean  as  a  mirror  of  more  ancient  times,  but  it 
contains  more  that  is  useful  to  one  seeking  knowledge 
of  the  period  in  which  it  was  written.  This  feature 
can  be  brought  clearly  to  view  only  by  going  through 


THE  EPHRAIMITE  SOURCE  103 

it  and  noting,  not  only  any  additions  it  makes  to  the 
genuinely  ancient  material  available,  but  the  ethical 
variations  from  the  older  narrative.  The  following  are 
the  results  of  such  a  study  of  the  extracts  from  it  found 
in  Genesis: 

It  will  be  remembered  that,  in  12:11  fif.  Abraham, 
and  in  26:6  ff.  Isaac,  represents  his  wife  to  be  his  sister, 
thus  exposing  her  to  danger  for  his  own  protection.  In 
the  Ephraimite  narrative  the  story  is  told  of  Abraham 
only,'  and  with  a  significant  modification.  This  author 
could  not  admit  that  the  patriarch  had  ever  been  guilty 
of  falsehood.  He  therefore  put  into  his  mouth  the 
explanation,  "She  is  indeed  my  sister,  the  daughter  of 
my  father,  but  not  the  daughter  of  my  mother.''^ 
This  is  a  striking  proof  of  ethical  development  under  the 
influence  of  the  early  prophets.  At  the  same  time, 
however,  it  illustrates  the  gradual  character  of  that 
development,  since  a  marriage  between  half-bloods 
would  not  now  be  tolerated,  and  even  among  the 
Hebrews  of  later  generations  it  was  reckoned  as  incest.^ 

In  Gen.,  chap.  22,  the  Ephraimite  writer  deals  with 
a  custom,  human  sacrifice,  common  among  the  neigh- 
boring peoples,"*  which  was  sometimes  practiced  by  the 
Hebrews.  Thus,  it  appears  from  the  story  of  Jephthah, 
which  is  attributed  to  the  same  author,  that  it  was  toler- 
ated in  the  time  of  the  Judges,^  and  there  is  abundant 
evidence  for  a  much  later  period;^  but  it  was  abhorrent 
to  the  humane  principles  of  the  prophets  and  the  story 
here  told  was  evidently  intended  to  express  disapproval 

^  Gen.  20:2  ff.  4 II  Kings  3:27. 

"Vs.  12.  s  Judg.  11:31,  39. 

3  Lev.  20:1;  Deut.  27:22.  ^  Jer.  7:31,  etc. 


I04        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

i 

of  it  as  well  as  commendation  of  the  submissive  disposi- 
tion of  the  father  of  the  faithful. 

There  are  several  points  to  be  noted  in  the  story  of 
Jacob.  In  the  first  place,  in  the  account  of  the  decep- 
tion practiced  on  Isaac  to  obtain  his  blessing/  according 
to  the  Elohist,^  Jacob  hesitated  about  entering  into  his 
mother's  plan  until  she  offered  to  take  all  the  blame  in 
case  of  failure.^  Moreover,  in  this  version  he  is  not 
represented  as  lying  outright  respecting  his  identity, 
as  he  does  repeatedly  in  the  other."*  The  Ephraimite 
narrative  varies  from  the  Judean,  also,  in  its  explana- 
tion of  Jacob's  rise  to  wealth.  The  latter  describes  him 
as  employing  a  device  by  which  he  controlled  the  color 
of  the  young  of  the  flock  imder  his  care,  and  thus  suc- 
ceeded in  getting  possession  of  most  of  the  increase  for 
several  years  in  Keu  of  wages. ^  The  Ephraimite  in  his 
day  could  not  indorse  any  such  method.  His  explana- 
tion is  found  in  Gen.  31:45.,  where  Jacob,  in  an  inter- 
view with  his  wives,  protests  his  loyalty  to  their  father 
in  spite  of  the  latter's  untrustworthiness,  and  declares 
that  the  cattle  were  taken  from  Laban  and  transferred 
to  him  by  God  as  a  reward  for  his  faithfulness.  It  is 
clear  that  this  author  thought  it  beneath  a  man  to  lie 
and  deceive  his  fellows.  He  did  not,  however,  expect 
equal  truthfulness  from  women.  His  opinion  of  them 
appears  in  the  character  he  gives  Rebekah,  but  more 
clearly  in  his  portrayal  of  Rachel,  whom  he  represents 
as  steaUng  her  father's  teraphim^  and  outwitting  him 
in  his  efforts  to  find  it.^ 

'  Gen.,  chap.  27.         '  Vss.  11  f.  '  Vss.  13. 

4  Cf.  vss.  i8a,  21-23  with  i8b-20,  24-27. 

s  Gen.  30:375.  ^  Gen.  31:19.  7  Vs.  27. 


THE  EPHRAIMITE  SOURCE  105 

The  Ephraimite  narrator  had  a  rather  poor  opinion 
of  women,  but  he  did  not  allow  himself  to  go  too  far 
in  that  direction.  This  appears  in  his  version  of  the 
story  of' Dinah. ^  The  older  writer  had  said  distinctly 
that  Shechem  had  ravished  the  girl  before  he  proposed 
to  marry  her,  and  that  Simeon  and  Levi  killed  him 
to  avenge  the  indignity  put  upon  their  sister.^ 
According  to  this  other  no  outrage  was  committed — 
God  forbid! — ^but  the  sons  of  Jacob,  being  offended 
that  Hamor  had  asked  for  their  sister  for  his  son 
and  proposed  a  general  intermarriage  between  them 
and  his  people,  pretended  to  accept  these  overtures, 
and,  when  the  Shechemites  had  been  circumcised  and 
thus,  for  the  time  being,  rendered  helpless,  massacred 
them  without  mercy .^ 

The  story  of  Joseph  is  ethically  somewhat  modified 
in  the  Ephraimite,  as  compared  with  the  Judean,  form. 
In  the  latter,  for  example,  Judah  heartlessly  proposes 
to  sell  the  boy,  and  this  method  of  disposing  of  him  is 
adopted  ;4  but  in  the  former  Reuben  suggests  that  he 
be  thrown  into  a  pit,  intending  to  rescue  him  from  his 
brothers,  and  fails  in  this  purpose  only  because  the 
Midianites  have  meanwhile  found  Joseph  and  taken  him 
with  them  on  their  way  to  Egypt.^  Note,  also,  that 
the  later  writer  seems  to  have  omitted  entirely  the 
assault  upon  Joseph's  virtue  by  Potiphar's  wife.^ 
Finally,  the  same  author  disarms  criticism  of  the 
young  man's  brothers  in  a  measure  by  putting  into 
his  mouth  the  declaration  that  his  removal  to  Egypt 

*  Gen.,  chap.  34.  ■*  Gen.  37: 26  f. 

*  Vss.  2b,  7,  30  f.  s  Vss.  22,  28a. 
3  Vss.  2a,  4,  8  f.,  25  (in  part).  ^  Gen.  39: 7  ff. 


io6       THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

was  a  providential  arrangement  for  the  preservation  of 
the  family/ 

The  citations  above  given  confirm  the  estimate  of 
the  Ephraimite  narrative  now  current  among  biblical 
scholars.  They  show  that  its  author  regarded  the 
materials  supplied  him,  whether  by  tradition  or  written 
documents,  not  from  the  Uterary  or  historical  so  much  as 
from  the  reHgious  point  of  view,  and  that,  Hving,  as  he 
did,  when  the  influence  of  the  prophets  had  begun  to 
have  its  effect  on  the  moral  standards  of  his  people,  he 
suppressed  or  modified  such  details  in  his  sources  as  did 
not  seem  to  him  to  suit  the  then  stage  of  ethical  develop- 
ment. Thus  the  patriarchs  took  their  place  among  the 
moral  and  religious  teachers  of  the  Hebrews. 

2.      THE  EPHRAIMITE   ACCOUNT  OF  THE  EXODUS 

In  the  discussion  of  the  Judean  account  of  the  Exodus 
it  was  found  necessary  to  rearrange  some  of  the  frag- 
ments of  it  that  have  been  preserved  in  the  Books  of 
Exodus  and  Numbers.  There  is  need  of  similar  treat- 
ment in  the  case  of  the  Ephraimite  narrative,  with 
which,  indeed,  the  compilers  took  greater  liberties  than 
with  its  predecessor.  In  this,  as  in  the  other  instance, 
it  is  chiefly  the  legislation  that  has  been  transposed. 
For  example,  there  is  good  ground  for  believing  that 
the  Decalogue  of  Exod.,  chap.  20,  which  has  generally 
been  attributed  to  the  Elohist,  is  largely  of  a  later  date, 
the  last  eight  commands  of  the  original  series  having 
been  separated  from  the  other  two  and  inserted  in  the 
code  called  ^'The  Book  of  the  Covenant,"  which  now 
immediately  follows  Exod.  20:21.    Secondly,  the  story 

»Gen.  45:6f. 


THE  EPHRAIMITE  SOURCE  107 

of  the  visit  of  Jethro,  Moses'  father-in-law,  and  the 
establishment,  at  his  suggestion,  of  a  judicial  system 
among  the  Hebrews,  probably,  when  it  was  written, 
followed,  rather  than  preceded,'  the  original  Decalogue. 
Finally,  it  seems  plausible,  as  good  authorities  now  main- 
tain, that  the  Book  of  the  Covenant,  in  its  original  form, 
came  toward  the  end  of  the  account  of  the  Exodus, 
whence  it  was  removed,  after  the  union  of  the  two  earlier 
documents,  to  make  room  for  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy. 
There  are  various  reasons  for  these  critical  dicta,  one 
of  which,  that  the  narrative,  when  read  in  accordance 
with  them,  becomes  more  intelHgible  than  it  is  in  its 
present  arrangement,  will  justify  their  application  in 
the  present  instance. 

The  Ephraimite  narrative,  outside  the  legislative 
portions,  contains  little  bearing  on  the  subject  under 
investigation.  There  are,  however,  a  few  points  that 
require  attention.  Here,  as  in  the  Judean  account, 
of  course,  Moses  is  the  principal  figure,  but  he  is  not 
the  impulsive  and  almost  violent  character  of  that 
source.  In  fact,  he  is  represented  as  a  pattern  of  meek- 
ness and  moderation,  and  various  incidents  are  narrated 
in  which  he  appears  in  this  character.  Thus,  he  ques- 
tions his  own  worthiness  to  act  as  the  messenger  of 
Yahweh  to  Pharaoh;^  his  only  response  to  the  murmurs 
of  the  people  is  an  appeal  to  Yahweh  ;3  at  the  suggestion  of 
Jethro  he  transfers  his  judicial  authority  in  large  measure 
to  others  ;4  and,  finally,  he  requests,  rather  than  demands, 
of  the  Edomites  and  the  Amorites  a  passage  through 

^  Exod.,  chap.  18.  *  Exod.  3:11. 

JExod.  15:24  f.;  17:3  f-;  11:  if.;  12:1,13. 
4  Exod.  i8:25f. 


io8        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

their  countries  for  Israel/  It  is  only  on  the  occasion 
of  the  discovery  of  the  golden  calf  that  he  gives  place 
to  anger,  which,  however,  is  speedily  replaced  by  the 
most  unselfish  anxiety  for  the  offenders.^ 

The  Ephraimite  author  reveals  his  peculiar  views  on 
the  subject  of  lying  in  this,  as  he  did  in  the  preceding 
period;  for  while  he  puts  into  the  mouth  of  Moses  a 
straightforward  demand  upon  Pharaoh  for  the  release 
of  his  people  from  bondage,^  he  makes  no  attempt  to 
mend  the  story  of  the  midwives,  who  resorted  to  false- 
hood to  save  themselves  from  punishment  for  omitting 
to  destroy  the  male  children  of  the  Hebrews  at  birth/ 
His  opinion  of  women  appears  also  in  3 :  21  f .,  where  the 
Hebrew  women,  on  the  eve  of  the  Exodus,  are  directed 
to  take  advantage  of  the  terror  produced  by  the  plague 
to  spoil  the  Egyptians/ 

The  passage  just  cited  is  interesting,  not  only 
because  it  betrays  a  derogatory  opinion  of  women,  but 
because  here,  as  in  the  case  of  the  transfer  of  Laban's 
wealth  to  Jacob,  the  author  seems  to  have  thought  of 
God  as  above  the  ethical  requirements  to  which  human 
beings  are  amenable.  These  passages,  however,  are 
not  so  troublesome  to  the  cursory  reader  as  those  from 
the  same  hand  in  which  God  is  represented  as  harden- 
ing Pharaoh's  heart,  lest  the  king  should  too  readily 
submit  to  the  demand  of  Moses  for  the  liberation  of  his 

^  Num.  20:14  flE.;  21:21  f.  'Exod.  32:19  f.,  30  ff. 

3  Exod.  5:1;  cf.'  vs.  3  Q).  In  the  present  text  this  passage  reads, 
"Let  my  people  go,  that  they  may  hold  a  feast  unto  me  in  the  desert," 
but  it  is  clear  from  3 :  10  that  the  final  clause  is  a  harmonistic  addition. 
See  also  3:21  f. 

*  Exod.  I :  IS  ff.  s  See  also  12:35. 


THE  EPHRAIMITE  SOURCE  109 

people.^  Now,  it  is  needless  to  deny  that  all  of  these 
passages  fall  short  of  a  worthy  representation  of  the 
Deity,  but  they  appear  less  objectionable  when  one 
considers  that  the  fundamental  thought  in  each  of  them 
is  really  the  divine  justice,  and  that  this  idea  cannot, 
even  now,  be  said  to  have  been  developed  "unto 
perfection." 

The  mountain  toward  which  the  Hebrews  directed 
their  march  on  leaving  Egypt  is  called  by  the  Ephraimite 
narrator  "Horeb."  Here  Yahweh  revealed  himself 
amid  thunderings  and  lightnings  to  the  assembled 
people,  and  gave  them  a  decalogue  corresponding  to  the 
one  found  in  Exod.,  chap.  34.  This  decalogue,  as 
already  intimated,  is  now  preserved,  partly  in  the 
Decalogue  of  Exod.,  chap.  20,  and  partly  in  the  Book 
of  the  Covenant  (Exod.,  chaps.  21-23).  How  closely  it 
resembled  the  Judean  will  appear  if  these  are  set  over 
against  one  another,  on  the  one  hand,  from  J.  Exod. 
34:14,  17,  19,  21,  22a,  22b,  25a,  25b,  26a,  and  26b,  and 
on  the  other  from  E.  Exod.  20:3,  4,  24;  22:29a, 
29b-3o;  23:iof.,  12,  15,  i6a,  and  i6b. 

The  first  thing  that  strikes  one  on  comparing  these 
two  decalogues  is  their  remarkable  similarity,  no  fewer 
than  seven  of  the  commands  being  common  to  both  of 
them.  Next,  one  notes  that  the  three  pecuhar  to  the 
later  list  are  easily  explained  as  the  product  of  a  natural 
development,  III  being  a  legalization  of  the  local  sanc- 
tuaries of  the  Northern  Kingdom,  VI  an  extension  of 
VII,  and  VIII  a  recognition  of  the  coalescence  of  the  pass- 
over  with  the  feast  of  unleavened  bread.     Finally,  it 

^  Exod.  10:20,  27. 


no        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

occurs  to  one  that  in  this  second,  as  in  the  first  deca- 
logue, the  commands  are  all  of  a  reHgious  character,  and 
have  ethical  significance  only  as  the  basis  of  a  covenant 
between  Yahweh  and  his  people.  See  Exod.  24:3  ff., 
which  originally  applied  to  the  Decalogue,  but  has  been 
revised  and  made  to  refer  to  the  Book  of  the  Covenant, 
which  now  immediately  precedes. 

The  Ephraimite  narrator,  however,  does  not  stop 
here.  He  proceeds,  in  his  account  of  the  visit  of  Jethro, 
which  is  now  wrongly,  as  chap.  18,  inserted  before  the 
Decalogue  as  well  as  the  Book  of  the  Covenant,  to 
depict  Moses  as  a  judge,^  sitting  "from  morning  until 
evening"  to  make  known  to  those  who  had  suits  to 
plead  "the  judgments^  of  God,"  and  finally,  by  the 
urgent  advice  of  his  father-in-law,  appointing  subordi- 
nates of  various  grades  to  relieve  him  of  the  decision 
of  all  but  the  "hard  causes."  Note,  however,  that 
although  Moses  is  here  at  once  prophet  and  judge, 
the  two  spheres  of  his  activity  are  kept  distinct,  showing 
that,  even  after  Amos,  the  Hebrews  were  slow  to  per- 
ceive how  intimate  is  the  relation  between  morals  and 
religion. 

A  judicial  system  as  elaborate  as  that  said  to  have 
been  established  by  Moses  would  naturally,  in  time, 
produce  a  body  of  decisions  and  precedents  like  the  so- 
called  Book  of  the  Covenant.  The  Ephraimite  author, 
however,  does  not  look  for  the  origin  of  the  code  in  any 
such  process.  He  derives  it  directly  from  God.  He 
doubtless  taught,  in  his  narrative  as  originally  written, 
that  it  was  given  to  Moses  in  Moab  and  by  him  com- 
municated to  the  children  of  Israel  just  before  he  died 

» Vss.  14  fif. 


THE  EPHRAIMITE  SOURCE  ill 

and  they  invaded  Canaan.  It  consists  of  Exod.  21:1 — 
23:19,  except  the  passages  already  cited  as  parts  of 
the  Elohistic  Decalogue  and  certain  others  of  a  Deu- 
teronomic  character  inserted  by  later  writers.  Purged 
of  these  foreign  elements,  it  consists,  according  to 
Baentsch,  of  Exod.  21:1-36;  22:i-2ia,  25a,  26-28; 
23:1-3,  6-8. 

This  collection  is  not  a  haphazard  one,  but  orderly 
enough  to  be  called  a  proper  code.  First,  there  is  a 
series  of  laws  (21:1-16,  18-32)  dealing  with  injuries  to 
the  person.  It  is  followed  by  another  (21:33 — 22:17) 
on  damages  to  rights  in  property;  then  by  seven  items 
(22:i8-2ia,  25a,  26,  28)  forming  a  group  of  a  somewhat 
miscellaneous'  character;  and  finally  by  another  group 
(22:21a,  23,  25,  26  f.;  23:1-3,  6-8)  prohibiting  various 
abuses  in  the  administration  of  justice.  These  two 
groups  betray  the  influence  of  the  prophets,  and  were 
therefore  probably  added  when  the  code  was  incorpo- 
rated into  the  Ephraimite  narrative. 

The  body  of  the  code  is  older — ^how  much  older  it  is 
difficult  to  determine.  In  discussing  this  question  it 
has  been  customary  to  call  attention  to  some  of  the 
"statutes,''  as  the  Hebrews  called  the  component 
enactments,  which  presuppose  a  settled  agricultural 
life;  for  example,  Exod.  22:5  f.,  where  the  background 
consists  of  fields  and  vineyards.  It  was  assumed  that 
such  regulations  would  not  be  made  until  they  were 
needed,  and  it  was  argued  that  they  could  not  be  older, 
and  probably  were  considerably  later,  than  the  date  of 

^Two  of  the  verses  in  Baentsch's  list  (22:23,  27)  are  omitted  as 
accretions  to  the  laws  in  vss.  21a  and  26.  Perhaps  21:17  should  be 
inserted  before  22:18. 


112        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

the  arrival  of  the  tribes  in  Canaan.  This  argument 
assumed  also  that  the  code,  whatever  its  age,  originated 
among  the  Hebrews.  Such  an  assumption,  however, 
can  now  no  longer  go  unchallenged;  for  the  discovery 
of  the  Code  of  Hammurabi  has  shown  that  similar 
laws  were  in  force  in  Babylonia  centuries  before 
Moses,  and,  since  Canaan  was  then  and  for  generations 
afterward  a  part  of  the  Babylonian  empire,  doubtless  in 
that  country  also.  This  being  the  case  it  will  be 
worth  while  to  compare  Exod.  21:2  with  Ham.  117; 
Exod.  21:7-11  with  Ham.  119;  Exod.  21:15  with 
Ham.  195;  Exod.  21:16  with  Ham.  14;  Exod.  2i:i8f. 
with  Ham.  206;  Exod.  21:22  with  Ham.  209;  Exod. 
21:23-25  with  Ham.  210;  Exod.  21:28  with  Ham.  250; 
Exod.  2i:29f.  with  Ham.  251;  Exod.  21:32  with 
Ham.  252;  Exod.  22:1,  3b,  4  with  Ham.  8;  Exod. 
22:2-3a  with  Ham.  21;  Exod.  22:5  with  Ham.  57; 
Exod.  22: 6  with  Ham.  55;  Exod.  22:7  f.  with  Ham.  125; 
Exod.  22:9  with  Ham.  9-1 1;  Exod.  22:iof.  with 
Ham.  266;  Exod.  22: 12  f.  with  Ham.  267;  Exod.  22: 14- 
15a  with  Ham.  244;  Exod.  22:18  with  Ham.  2;  and 
Exod.  23 : 1  with  Ham.  3  f . 

The  result  of  the  comparison  of  these  codes  is  instruct- 
ive, in  the  first  place,  on  account  of  the  number  of 
cases  of  more  or  less  striking  correspondence.  The 
main  body  of  the  Ephraimite  code  (Exod.  21:2-16, 
18-36;  23:1-16)  consists  of  twenty-seven  more  or  less 
distinct  enactments.  Of  these  there  are  no  fewer  than 
nineteen  for  which  there  are  corresponding  statutes 
in  the  Code  of  Hammurabi. 

The  degree  of  resemblance  between  the  two  codes, 
too,  is  remarkable.    The  Hebrew  laws  are  generally 


THE  EPHRAIMITE  SOURCE  113 

cast  in  the  hypothetical  form,  with  when  or  if  as  an 
introductory  particle;  but  there  are  a  few  (21:12, 
15-17)  that  are  introduced  by  the  subject  of  the  action 
described;  and  this  is  precisely  the  case  in  the  Baby- 
lonian code,  where  there  are  only  four  of  the  two  hundred 
and  eighty-two  paragraphs  that  do  not  begin  with  the 
hypothetical  particle.  More  remarkable  than  this  is 
another  coincidence.  In  Exod.  22:7  f.  it  is  provided 
that,  when  property  left  by  one  person  in  the  keeping 
of  another  is  reported  to  have  been  stolen,  the  guardian 
of  the  property  shall  "come  near  to  God  to  see  whether 
he  have  not  put  his  hand  to  his  neighbor's  goods ''; 
and  the  same  provision  is  made,  vs.  9,  in  the  case  of 
property  lost,  when  discovered  in  the  hands  of  another 
party.  The  expression  used  is  peculiar,  yet  it  is  the  one 
foimd  in  similar  connections  in  the  Code  of  Hammurabi.' 
Other  points  of  resemblance  might  be  mentioned, 
but  these  seem  sufficient  to  indicate  that  the  two  codes 
are  related.  The  relation  between  them  is  perhaps 
best  explained  by  supposing  that  the  Code  of  Ham- 
murabi, soon  after  its  promulgation,  became  the  law  of 
Canaan  as  well  as  of  Babylonia,  that  the  substance  of 
it  remained  as  a  part  of  the  common  law  after  the  con- 
quest of  the  country  by  the  Hebrews,  and  that  when, 
after  the  kingdom  of  David  was  divided,  someone 
undertook  to  provide  the  northern  tribes  with  a  code 
of  their  own,  it  was  naturally  based  on  the  common 
law,  and  thus,  in  a  sense,  on  its  Babylonian  predecessor. 
When  the  Ephraimite  author  incorporated  this  code 

^§§9,  126.  In  this  case  the  correspondence  is  not  exact,  but 
§  126  is  closely  related  to  §  125,  the  one  cited.  For  other  cases  in  which 
the  Babylonian  code  requires  appearance  before  God,  see  §§  103,  106, 
107,  120,  281. 


114       THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

into  his  narrative  he  put  into  concrete  and  practical 
form  the  doctrine  of  the  prophets,  of  whom  he  was  one, 
that  domestic  and  social  obhgations  are,  as  really  as  if 
they  were  audible  to  the  outer  ear,  commands  of  God. 

It  is  plain  that  the  Ephraimite  code,  through  its 
relation  to  that  of  Hammurabi,  has  acquired  a  new 
importance.  It  will  therefore  be  worth  while  to  analyze 
it  and  determine  how  great  progress  it  registers. 

This  code  has  Httle  that  bears  on  the  subject  of 
personal  ethics.  In  fact,  the  only  passage  that  needs 
to  be  cited  in  this  connection  is  Exod.  22:19,  where  it 
is  ordained  that  "whosoever  Heth  with  a  beast  shall 
surely  be  put  to  death." 

There  is  more  touching  the  family.  The  father  is 
an  absolute  master.  He  can  sell  his  wife'  or  his  daughter* 
into  bondage,  and,  if  anyone  violates  the  latter,  he  can 
force  the  offender  to  marry  her  or  pay  him  adequate 
damages. 3  The  practice  of  polygamy  is  recognized, 
but  there  are  restrictions  to  be  observed.  A  husband 
may  not  sell  a  Hebrew  concubine  except  for  redemp- 
tion; nor  may  he  neglect  her  when,  for  any  reason,  he 
adds  a  second  wife  to  his  household."*  If  he  does,  she 
becomes  entitled  to  her  freedom. ^  Children  are  not 
permitted  to  treat  their  parents  with  irreverence.  He 
that  either  strikes^  or  curses^  his  father  or  his  mother 
is  to  be  put  to  death.  The  treatment  of  slaves  is 
carefully  regulated.  In  the  first  place,  it  is  forbidden, 
on  pain  of  death,  to  kidnap  men  and  sell  them  into 
slavery,'^  but  a  thief  may  be  reduced  to  servitude,  if  he 

^Exod.  21:3.  <Exod.  21:10.  'Exod.  21:17. 

»  Exod.  21:7.  s  Exod.  21:11.  •  Exod.  21 :  16. 

J  Exod.  22 :  16.  '  Exod.  21:15. 


THE  EPHRAIMITE  SOURCE  115 

cannot  pay  his  fine/  If  a  man  sells  himself,  he  may  be 
held  in  bondage  only  six  years,^  unless  for  love  of  a  wife, 
also  a  slave,  and  their  children,  he  chooses  to  remain  with 
his  master.3  A  female  slave  whom  her  master  has 
given  to  his  son  must  be  treated  "after  the  manner  of 
daughters."'*  The  master  may  not  treat  his  slaves  with 
cruelty.  If  he  kills  one  of  them  outright  he  must  be 
punished  as  for  killing  any  other  person,^  and,  if  he 
seriously  maims  one  of  them,  he  must  set  the  sufferer 
free.^  If  a  slave  is  injured  by  an  ugly  ox,  his  master 
is  entitled  to  damages  to  the  amount  of  thirty  shekels 
of  silver.7  The  last  three  enactments,  which  seem  to 
apply  to  foreign  as  well  as  Hebrew  slaves,  must  have 
been  very  influential  in  protecting  them  from  injury. 

In  the  field  of  social  ethics  the  right  to  life  takes 
precedence  of  all  others.  It  is  the  first  to  receive  pro- 
tection in  this  code.  The  penalty  for  the  violation  of 
it  is  death.  In  earher  times,  when  the  lex  talionis  was 
in  unrestricted  operation,  no  one  stopped  to  ask  whether 
the  slayer  did  the  deed  by  accident  or  with  mahce 
prepense.  Joab  took  the  Hfe  of  Abner,  although  he 
knew  that  his  rival  had  killed  his  brother  in  self-defense.* 
In  this  code  the  difference  between  voluntary  and 
involuntary  homicide  is  clearly  recognized;  the  general 
law  being  followed  by  the  proviso  that  there  shall  be  a 
refuge,  namely,  the  nearest  sanctuary,  where  the  slayer 
may  find  safety  until  it  is  shown  that  he  is  guilty  of 
murder.  If  he  is,  he  may  be  taken  from  the  very  altar 
and  executed.'    There  is  one  exception,   if  it  is  an 

*Exod.  22:3.  4Exod.  21:9.  7  Exod.  21:32. 

*  Exod.  21 : 2-4.  s  Exod.  21 :  20  f.  *  II  Sam.  2 :  18  ff. 

3Exod.  2i:5f.  *  Exod.  21:26  f.  '  Exod.  21:12-14. 


Il6       THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

exception,  to  the  rule  that  homicide  is  murder  only  when 
premeditated.  It  is  the  case  in  which  a  woman  dies 
as  the  result  of  a  miscarriage  caused  by  injuries  received 
from  one  of  two  or  more  men  in  a  quarrel.  Then  the 
penalty  is  Ufe  for  life;^  but  one  must  conclude  from  the 
corresponding  paragraph,  210, in  the  Code  of  Hammurabi, 
that  it  is  not  the  life  of  the  man  who  did  the  injury  that 
is  required,  but  that  of  his  wife  or  daughter;  the  idea 
apparently  being  that  the  sacrifice  of  a  woman  was  in 
the  nature  of  a  fine  imposed  upon  her  father  or  husband, 
as  her  owner,  like  the  damages  for  loss  of  time  and  the 
doctor's  bill  in  vss.  18  f. 

These  last  verses  deal  with  the  first  of  a  series  of 
injuries  to  the  person.  If  a  man  in  a  brawl  with  another 
hurts,  but  not  mortally,  his  opponent,  he  must  pay  the 
costs.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  a  man  injures  his  servant, 
and  the  latter  does  not  die  "under  his  hand,"  that  is, 
immediately,  the  master  is  not  punished,  except  in  the 
loss  of  his  property.^  In  the  case  of  the  pregnant 
woman,  if  she  suffers  short  of  death,  any  harm  that 
accrues  to  her  must  be  inflicted  upon  the  unfortunate 
woman  who  has  to  atone  for  her  husband's  or  father's 
clumsy  rage,  "eye  for  eye."^ 

The  Ephraimite  Code  protects  not  only  the  person 
but  the  property  of  its  ward:  first  against  criminal 
carelessness.  Thus,  if  a  man  leaves  a  pit  open,  he  must 
pay  for  any  animal  that  may  be  injured  by  falling  into 

*  Exod.  21 :  23.  'Exod.  21 :  20  f. 

^Exod.  21:24!.  Baentsch  attaches  vss.  23-25  to  vs.  19,  thus 
making  them  refer  to  the  first  case  of  a  quarrel.  This,  however,  can 
hardly  be  correct,  since  vs.  22  requires  such  an  alternative  and  vs.  19 
does  not  need  one,  being  itself  the  alternative  to  vs.  18. 


.     THE  EPHRAIMITE  SOURCE  117 

it/  If  he  knowingly  keeps  an  ox  that  gores,  he  must  be 
prepared  to  pay  for  slaves,  as  above  noted,  or  cattle 
that  it  may  have  killed.*  If  he  lets  his  cattle  roam  into 
a  neighbor's  field,  he  must  indemnify  the  owner  of  that 
field  "from  the  best  of  his  own  field. "^  If  he  allows  a 
fire  that  he  has  kindled  for  any  purpose  to  spread  and 
destroy  a  neighbor's  crops,  he  must  "make  restitution. "^ 
If  he  allows  an  animal  entrusted  to  him  to  be  stolen,  he 
must  make  it  good.^ 

The  thief  is  more  severely  punished,  since  he,  for 
an  ox,  must  make  a  fivefold,  and  for  a  sheep  a  fourfold, 
recompense;  unless  the  stolen  animal  is  found  alive  in 
his  possession,  in  which  case  the  fine  is  only  twofold 
for  either  of  the  animals  mentioned  or  an  ass.^  If  the 
thief  be  caught  in  the  act  by  night,  the  owner  of  the 
property  jeopardized  may  even  kill  him  with  impunity, 
but,  if  by  day,  his  person  must  be  respected. ^  If  a 
man  has  anything  in  his  possession  that  another  claims 
as  stolen  property,  the  case  must  come  before  God; 
the  one  who  wins  it  receiving  from  the  other  twofold 
the  value  of  the  thing  claimed.*  This  law  would 
naturally  operate  to  prevent  slanderous  charges  as  well 
as  theft  or  the  tralB&c  in  stolen  goods. 

There  are  carefully  framed  laws  respecting  property 
committed  to  the  keeping  of  one  person  by  another. 
If  its  guardian  reports  it  stolen,  but  cannot  name  the 
thief,  the  case  must  be  brought  before  God,  to  see 
whether  he  has  not  himself  appropriated  "his  neigh- 
bor's  goods."'    So,    also,    when   the   property   is   an 

^Exod.  21:33  f.  '♦Exod.  22:6.  7Exod.  22:2f. 

'  Exod.  21:32,  35  f.        sExod.  22:12.  'Exod.  22:9. 

3  Exod.  22:5.  '  Exod.  22 : 1,  4.  '  Exod.  22 : 7  f. 


ii8        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

animal  which  dies,  or  is  hurt  or  stolen,  without  anyone's 
knowledge/  If  he  reports  it  torn  by  wild  beasts,  he 
must  bring  the  remains  of  it  as  proof,  or  make  restitu- 
tion.=*  When  a  man  borrows  an  animal  from  another, 
and  it  dies  or  is  hurt  while  he  is  using  it,  he  must  replace 
it,  unless  the  owner  was  with  it  or  received  hire  for  the 
use  of  it.^ 

There  remain  the  two  small  groups  of  laws  with 
which  the  code  ends.  Most  of  them  may  be  regarded 
as  specifications  under  the  general  requirement  of  truth 
and  loyalty.  Thus,  in  Exod.  22:20  the  Israelite  is 
forbidden  to  sacrifice  to  "any  God  save  Yahweh  only," 
and  in  vs.  28  to  "revile  God"  or  "curse  the  ruler"  his 
representative.  In  this  connection  should  also,  perhaps, 
be  cited  22:18,  "Thou  shalt  not  suffer  a  sorceress  to 
live."  The  acts  prohibited  are  forms  of  disloyalty  to 
Yahweh.  The  rest  of  these  laws  deal  with  the  various 
ways  by  which  justice  is  perverted.  They  prohibit 
slander,^  perjury ,s  conspiracy,*  partiality ,7  lawlessness,^ 
and  bribery.' 

A  code  of  laws  published  about  the  middle  of  the 
eighth  century  before  the  Christian  era  would  have  been 
incomplete  without  a  section  on  the  treatment  of  the 
unfortunate.     It  is  not  surprising,  therefore,  to  find 

^  Exod.  22 :  10  f.  '  Exod.  22 :  13. 

»Exod.  22:14.  There  is  another  rendering  for  vs.  15b,  namely, 
"If  he  (the  one  responsible  for  the  death  or  injury  of  the  animal)  is 
a  hireling,  it  (the  price  of  the  animal)  comes  out  of  his  wages."  So 
Baentsch. 

*  Exod.  23 : 1.  5  ihid,  6  Exod.  23 : 2. 

'  Exod.  23:3,  6.  In  vs.  3,  for  "a  poor  man"  read  "a  great  man," 
thus  producing  an  antithesis  with  vs.  6. 

•  Exod.  23 : 7.  9  Exod.  23 : 8. 


THE  EPHRAIMITE  SOURCE  1 19 

that  this  one  protects  the  poor  debtor,  forbidding  any- 
one who  loans  him  money  to  act  the  usurer  toward  him' 
or  keep  the  garment  taken  in  pledge  over  night.*  Here 
belongs,  also,  the  law  prohibiting  the  oppression  of  the 
stranger  in  Israel.^ 

Such  is  the  Ephraimite  code,  in  the  form  in  which  it 
was  incorporated  into  the  narrative  of  which  it  once 
formed  a  part.  It  was  a  very  simple  instrument, 
hardly  adequate  to  the  wants  of  the  most  primitive 
community.  Still,  it  furnished  a  standard  of  conduct, 
and  as  such  doubtless  was  useful  in  a  pedagogic  way. 
Meanwhile  the  prophets  taught,  and  so  dihgently,  that, 
at  the  end  of  a  century,  this  code  had  to  be  rewritten 
to  represent  the  best  ethical  sentiment  of  the  Judah  of 
that  day. 

3.      THE  EPHRAIMITE  NARRATIVE  IN  JOSHUA, 
JUDGES,   AND   SAMUEL 

In  the  preceding  books  the  Ephraimite  narrative 
has  followed  pretty  closely  the  outline  of  the  Judean. 
The  same  is  the  case  in  the  Book  of  Joshua,  where, 
moreover,  the  extracts  from  the  two  works  are  some- 
times so  skilfully  wrought  together  that  there  are 
scholars  who  do  not  attempt  to  separate  them.  In 
Judges  and  Samuel  they  are  more  independent  and 
more  easily  distinguishable.  One  difference  between 
them  is  found  in  the  characters  that  they  portray,  most 
of  those  in  the  Ephraimite  narrative  being  ethically 
more  developed,  but  less  real  and  interesting  than  their 

^  Exod.  22:25a.  The  latter  half  of  this  verse,  forbidding  discount, 
that  is,  a  percentage  deducted  beforehand  from  the  face  of  the  loan, 
is  an  addition  to  the  original  text. 

*  Exod.  22 :  26.  3  Exod.  22 :  21a. 


120        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

Judean  counterparts.  Joshua  is  most  changed.  In 
the  older  references  to  him  he  is  a  lusty  warrior,  per- 
fectly human,  who  is  always  at  the  front  in  battle.' 
In  the  Ephraimite  narrative  he  is  less  natural  and  heroic. 
Thus,  in  his  first  battle,  as  described  in  Exod.  17:8  if., 
it  is  not  he  who  holds  the  attention  of  the  reader  or 
really  defeats  the  Amalekites,  but  Moses  sitting,  with 
hand  and  staff  upraised,  on  a  neighboring  hilltop. 
The  Judean  author  represents  him  as  taking  Jericho  by 
storm,*  but  according  to  the  other,  ''the  wall  fell  down 
flat,  so  that  the  people  went  up  into  the  city,  every 
man  straight  before  him."^  The  battle  at  Ai,  according 
to  the  same  authority,  was  but  a  repetition  of  the  one  at 
Rephidim,  except  that  Joshua,  with  his  javelin,  takes 
the  place  of  his  former  master ;"»  while  at  Beth-horon 
Yahweh  killed  more  with  his  hailstones  than  the  children 
of  Israel  slew  with  the  sword.^  In  the  battle  of  the 
Kishon,  another  Rephidim,  Barak  gets  his  courage  from 
a  woman,  and  Sisera  is  an  easy  victim  for  Jael's  mallet.^ 
Gideon,  too,  is  less  robust  and  masterful  in  the  later 
than  in  the  ear  Her  version  of  his  exploits.  Compare 
the  mildness  of  his  bearing  toward  the  Ephraimites 
in  Judg.  8 : 1-3  (E)  with  the  sternness  of  his  treatment 
of  the  people  of  Succoth  and  Penuel  in  vss.  4^.  (J). 
The  case  of  Abimelech,  also,  is  interesting.  The  Judean 
account  of  him^  leaves  him  master  of  the  field.  He 
resides  at  Arumah;     Gaal  and  his  clan  are  banished 

'Josh.  6:10;  8:5. 

2  Josh.  6 :  20,  the  first  and  the  last  clause. 

3  Josh.  6 :  20,  except  the  first  and  the  last  clause. 

4  Josh.  8: 18,  26.  ^  Judg.  4:8,  19  ff. 
s  Josh.  10:11.                                 'Judg.  9:26-41. 


THE  EPHRAIMITE  SOURCE  121 

from  Shechem.  There  is  no  attempt  to  point  a  moral. 
The  Ephraimite  version,*  on  the  other  hand,  is  a  lesson 
on  the  wickedness  of  fratricide  and  ingratitude,  and  the 
inevitableness  of  fitting  retribution.  The  intent  of  the 
author  is  so  evident  that  it  was  hardly  necessary  for 
him,  or  someone  like-minded,  to  add  the  reflection, 
"Thus  God  requited  the  wickedness  of  Abimelech,  which 
he  did  to  his  father  in  slaying  his  seventy  brethren. 
All  the  wickedness  of  the  men  of  Shechem,  also,  did 
God  requite  upon  their  heads,  in  that  upon  them  came 
the  curse  of  Jotham  the  son  of  Jerubbaal."^  It  is  Saul, 
however,  who  suffers  most  at  the  hands  of  this  author. 
In  the  first  place,  the  young  king  is  dwarfed  by  Samuel, 
in  the  Judean  narrative  a  local  seer,  but  here  a  majestic 
prophet  who  publicly  reproves  him  for  not  obeying 
instructions  and  finally  announces  his  rejection  by 
Yahweh.2  When  David  appears  he  at  once  ecKpses 
the  unfortunate  monarch,  who  is  finally  obliged  to 
efface  himself  and  defraud  his  son  to  the  extent  of 
acknowledging  the  victor  over  the  Philistine  giant  as 
his  legitimate  successor.'*  There  are  those  who  would 
find  in  Jephthah  an  exception  to  the  rule  above  stated. 
It  is  hardly  possible,  however,  to  believe  that  Judg. 
12:1-6  is  by  the  same  hand  as  11:34-40.  This  being 
admitted,  the  former  must  be  attributed  to  the  Judean, 
the  latter  to  the  Ephraimite,  author.  In  other  words, 
here  again  the  later  writer  betrays  his  date  and  bias 
by  transforming  the  rough-and-ready  soldier  of  earlier 
tradition,  who  carries  all  before  him,  into  a  pitiable 
victim  of  his  own  rashness,  and  incidentally  an  example 

*  Vss.  1-25,  42-55.  3 1  Sam.  15:  17  ff. 

»Vss.  56f.  '♦ISam.  i7:ifE;  23:17;  26:25. 


122        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

of  the  unnatural  cruelty  of  human  sacrifices.'  The  par- 
tiality of  this  author  for  David  has  already  been  noted. 
But  his  David,  partly,  perhaps,  because  his  account  has 
not  been  so  fully  preserved,  does  not  make  the  impres- 
sion upon  the  reader  that  is  made  by  the  Judean's. 

In  the  preceding  paragraph  attention  was  directed 
especially  to  the  personal  characters  of  individuals 
cited.  The  comparisons  there  made  showed  that  the 
Ephraimite  author,  in  his  accounts  of  them,  was  more 
sensitive  than  his  predecessor  to  ethical  considerations. 
The  result  is  similar  when  one  studies  his  references  to 
social  conditions  in  the  same  period.  In  the  first  place, 
although  he  recites  without  apparent  disapproval  the 
treachery  of  Jaelj^*  as  well  as  how  Rabah  deceived  the 
messengers  of  her  king^  and  Michal  Hed  to  protect 
David,^  he  represents  Joshua  as  reproving  the  Gibeonites 
for  deceiving  him,^  and  probably  intended  that  Saul's 
failure  to  give  his  daughter  Merab  to  David  according 
to  promise^  should  be  reckoned  to  his  discredit.  The 
last  two  cases  support  the  supposition  above  broached, 
that,  according  to  the  Ephraimite  author,  it  was  beneath 
a  man  to  He.  There  is  one  instance  that  seems  unrecon- 
cilable  with  such  a  conclusion,  namely,  that  of  David 
and  the  method  by  which  he  obtained  food  and  a  weapon 
when  he  was  fleeing  from  Saul.'  It  is  probable,  however, 
that  this  is  a  case  in  which  the  author  borrowed  from 
an  earlier  source  and  neglected  to  adapt  the  story  as  he 
received  it  to  his  own  conception  of  the  character  of 
David. 

I  Gen.  22:1  ff.  is  from  the  same  (E)  source. 

»  Judg.  4:i8£E.  •♦  i  Sam.  19 :  14  ff .  ^  j  g^m.  18: 17  ff. 

5  Josh.  2 : 5b.  5  Josh.  9 : 22a,  'I  Sam.  2 1 : i  ff . 


THE  EPHRAIMITE  SOURCE  123 

A  growing  regard  for  truth  is  certainly  indicated  by 
the  prominence  given  to  the  covenant  between  David 
and  Jonathan,  and  the  loyalty  of  the  young  men  to  each 
other.'  The  faithfulness  of  Jonathan  appears  in  the 
plea  by  which,  for  the  time  being,  he  quenched  the 
jealous  anger  of  his  father,^  and  the  willingness  with 
which,  at  their  last  meeting,  he  renounced  his  claim  to 
the  succession  in  favor  of  David.^ 

The  plea  of  Jonathan  is  further  notable  as  an  appeal 
to  Saul's  gratitude.  He  begs  his  father  not  to  sin 
against  his  friend,  for  one  reason,  "because,"  as  he  says, 
"his  works  have  been  to  thee-ward  very  good:  for  he 
took  his  life  in  his  hand,  and  smote  the  Philistine,  and 
Yahweh  wrought  a  great  victory  for  all  Israel."  This 
passage  recalls  an  earlier  one  from  the  Ephraimite 
narrative  in  Judg.  9:16  ff.,  where  Jotham,  in  his  pro- 
test against  the  choice  of  Abimelech  for  their  king  by  the 
Shechemites,  says,  "Now,  therefore,  if  ye  have  dealt 
truly  and  uprightly,  in  that  ye  have  made  Abimelech 
king,  and  if  ye  have  dealt  well  with  Jerubbaal  and  his 
house,  and  have  done  to  him  according  to  the  deserving 
of  his  hands  (for  my  father  fought  for  you,  and  adven- 
tured his  life,  and  dehvered  you  out  of  the  hand  of 
Midian;  and  ye  have  risen  up  against  my  father's 
house  this  day,  and  slain  his  sons,  three  score  and  ten 
persons,  on  one  stone,  and  made  Abimelech,  the  son  of 
his  maid-servant,  king  over  the  men  of  Shechem,  because 
he  was  your  brother),"  etc.  The  milder  note  here 
harmonizes  with  the  recognized  date  of  the  Ephraimite 
narrative. 

*  I  Sam.  18:3.  3 1  Sam.  23:15  ff. 

^  I  Sam.  19:45. 


124        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

There  was  almost  constant  hostility,  according  to 
the  Ephraimite  narrative,  between  the  Hebrews  and 
their  neighbors  before  the  establishment  of  the  monarchy 
under  David.  The  foreigners  are  generally  represented 
as  being  the  aggressors.  In  such  cases  the  author  does 
not  feel  called  to  explain  or  defend  the  wars  that  were 
waged.  When,  however,  he  comes  to  the  war  with 
Amelek,  in  which,  according  to  I  Sam.  15:45.,  the 
Hebrews  not  only  invaded  the  country  of  the  enemy, 
but  "utterly  destroyed  all  the  people  with  the  edge 
of  the  sword,"  he  cannot  let  this  barbarous  proceeding 
go  unexplained.  In  the  first  place,  he  says  that  it 
was  commanded  by  Yahweh  through  Samuel,  whom, 
secondly,  he  represents  as  justifying  his  own  severity 
by  recalling  the  hostiUty  of  the  Amelekites  to  his  people 
on  their  march  from  Egypt.'  In  other  words,  he  teaches 
that  God  is  not  an  arbitrary  ruler,  but  himself  conforms 
to  the  principles  by  which  he  requires  that  his  creatures 
shall  be  governed. 

a  Sam.  15:2  f.;  Exod.  17:8 ff. 


CHAPTER  X 

HOSEA  AND  HIS  TIMES 

The  prophet  Hosea  made  his  appearance  in  Israel 
a  few  years  after  Amos,  or  not  far  from  750  B.C.  At 
that  time  Jeroboam  II  was  still  alive,  but  he  died  about 
745  B.C.,  and  six  months  later  his  son  and  successor, 
Zechariah,  was  assassinated  and  the  dynasty  of  Jehu 
came  to  an  end.  It  was  a  certain  Shallum  the  son  of 
Jabesh  who  overthrew  it,  but  he  did  not  long  enjoy 
the  honor  he  had  usurped;  for  it  was  only  a  month  before 
"Menahem  the  son  of  Gadi  went  up  from  Tirzah," 
the  first  capital  of  the  Northern  Kingdom,'  "and  came 
to  Samaria,  and  smote  Shallumi  the  son  of  Jabesh,  and 
slew  him,  and  reigned  in  his  stead."*  He  succeeded  in 
maintaining  himself  on  the  throne  for  ten  years,  with 
the  aid  of  Tiglath-pileser,  the  king  of  Assyria,  to  whom, 
however,  in  738  B.C.  he  was  obliged  to  pay  "a  thousand 
talents  of  silver  that  his  hand  might  be  with  him  con- 
firming the  kingdom  in  his  hand.''  He  raised  the  money 
by  a  levy  on  the  wealthy  men  of  his  kingdom,  each  of 
whom  was  assessed  fifty  shekels  for  that  purpose.^ 
This  was  not  a  large  sum — only  about  $33.21 — but 
the  fact  that  there  were  six  thousand  men  who  could 
be  called  wealthy  shows  that  the  country  had  not 
suffered  seriously  during  the  revolution;  in  other 
words,  that  conditions  were  much  the  same  as  they 
were  when   Amos   startled   the  grandees  of   Samaria 

'I  Kings  14:17.  3II  Kings  15:19  f. 

"II  Kings  15:14. 

125 


126        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

from  their  luxurious  dreams  with  threats  of  an  Ass)Tian 
invasion/ 

Conditions  were  much  the  same,  but  the  two  prophets 
did  not  view  them  from  the  same  standpoint,  and  there- 
fore did  not  deal  with  them  in  the  same  manner.  Amos, 
with  his  keen  intellectuality,  set  himself  to  unmask 
the  errors  and  fallacies  of  his  time,  and  picture  the 
logical  and  inevitable  result  of  persistence  in  harboring 
them.  Hosea,  being  predominantly  emotional,  found 
the  source  of  all  the  evils  that  he  lamented  in  the  heart, 
and  sought  to  cure  them  by  appeals  to  the  affections. 
The  fundamental  thought  in  his  prophecies  has  already 
several  times  made  its  appearance.  It  is  the  idea  of 
a  covenant  between  Yahweh  and  his  people.  This 
prophet  believed,  with  Amos  and  others  who  had  pre- 
ceded him,  that  such  a  covenant  had  been  made  and 
broken,  but  he  gave  to  the  unfaithfulness  of  Israel 
more  prominence  than  his  predecessors,  and  clothed 
it  in  imagery  as  striking  as  it  was  novel.  He  calls  it 
harlotry,  and  finds  it  symbolized  by  the  unfaithfulness 
of  his  own  wife. 

The  figure  appears  in  the  first  chapter  of  his  book, 
where  he  says  that  at  the  beginning  of  his  ministry  he 
received  from  Yahweh  the  command,  "Go,  take  to 
thee  a  wife  of  whoredom  and  children  of  whoredom; 
for  the  land  committeth  whoredom  from  Yahweh;"* 
and  that,  in  obedience  to  this  command,  he  married 
Gomer  the  daughter  of  Diblaim,  who  bore  him  three 
children.  This  passage  has  had  so  many  and  such 
mistaken  interpretations  that  it  deserves  special  atten- 
tion.   There  are  those  who  claim  that  the  prophet 

»  Amos  5:27;  6:14;  7:i6f.  »Hos.  1:2. 


HOSEA  AND  HIS  TIMES  127 

must  here  be  relating  a  dream,  since  God  would  not 
command  the  act  described,  or  Hosea  obey  if  it  were 
commanded.  So  Aben  Ezra.  This  explanation  does 
credit  to  the  ethical  judgment  of  those  who  adopt  it, 
but  it  is  exegetically  indefensible.  A  similar  interpre- 
tation is  that  which  represents  the  prophet  as  describ- 
ing a  subjective  rather  than  an  objective  experience. 
So  Marck.  The  objection  to  this  is  that  throughout 
the  book  harlotry  is  treated  as  a  concrete  symbol, 
which  it  must  be  to  be  effective.  Those  who  interpret 
the  statement  cited  objectively  differ  on  some  points. 
Thus,  of  those  who  agree  that  Gomer  was  a  harlot 
when  Hosea  married  her,  some  suppose  that  she  then 
became  a  virtuous  woman  (Rohling),  while  others  insist 
that  she  "must  have  manifoldly  sinned,"  even  after 
marriage,  since  otherwise  she  could  not  "so  shadow 
forth  the  manifold  defilement  of  the  human  race." 
So  Pusey.  The  former  of  these  views  is  forbidden  by 
the  fact  that  the  woman  of  3:2,  who  is  described  as 
"an  adultress,"  is  none  other  than  Gomer  the  daughter 
of  Diblaim,  and  must  be  to  give  that  passage  any 
meaning.  The  latter  destroys  the  fitness  of  the  symbol 
as  here  used,  to  say  nothing  of  impeaching  the  sanity 
of  the  prophet  or  the  character  of  God.  The  only 
interpretation  that  avoids  all  the  above  objections  is  that 
of  Wellhausen,  according  to  which  Gomer  was  not 
actually  a  harlot  when  Hosea  married  her,  but  after- 
ward became  unfaithful,  and  that,  when  the  prophet 
came  to  reflect  on  his  experience  and  perceive  its  typical 
value,  he  believed  it  to  have  been  divinely  ordained, 
and  therefore,  as  any  other  prophet  would  have  done, 
represents  the  impulse  on  which  he  had  acted  as  a 


128        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

command  of  God.  The  teaching  of  Hosea,  then,  on 
this  point  is  that,  as  Gomer,  after  she  had  become  his 
by  the  law  and  custom  of  his  country,  violated  the  cove- 
nant between  them,  so  Israel,  after  Yahweh,  with  their 
consent,  had  taken  them  for  his  people,  and  provided 
them  with  a  goodly  land  to  dwell  in,  had  wantonly 
abandoned  him  for  the  worship  and  service  of  other 
gods.' 

At  this  point  there  is  need  of  further  explanation. 
The  first  impression  made  by  the  references  of  Hosea 
to  the  unfaithfulness  of  Israel  is  that  Baal  was  as 
openly  and  generally  worshiped  in  the  reign  of  Jeroboam 
II  as  in  that  of  Ahab.  This,  however,  as  is  clear  from 
the  prophecies  of  Amos,  was  not  the  case.  In  fact,  the 
people  whom  Hosea  arraigns  claimed,  and  Amos  did 
not  dispute  it,  that  they  were  worshipers  of  Yahweh. 
This  was  the  actual  situation:  When  the  Hebrews  took 
possession  of  Palestine,  or  a  part  of  it,  they  regarded 
themselves  as  the  people  of  Yahweh;  but  they  knew 
that  the  Canaanites  worshiped  Baal,  and,  not  having 
as  yet  grasped  the  doctrine  taught  by  Amos,  that  their 
God  was  the  imiversal  Lord,  they  were  naturally  led 
to  combine  the  worship  of  Baal  with  that  of  Yahweh, 
thinking  thus  to  insure  a  blessing  upon  the  corn,  wine, 
and  oil  that  they  were  cultivating.^  Later,  when  they 
came  to  beHeve  in  only  one  God,  they  seem  to  have 
identified  Yahweh  with  Baal  and  sometimes  to  have 
called  him  by  the  same  name.^  At  any  rate,  they 
incorporated  into  their  worship  idolatrous  features — 
when  Jeroboam  I  set  up  the  bulls  at  Bethel  and  Dan 

^Hos.  4:12;  5:4;  6:10;  9:1. 

»Hos.  2:8.  3Hos.  2:16. 


HOSEA  AND  HIS  TIMES  129 

he  proclaimed  them  the  God  that  brought  Israel  up' 
out  of  Egypt^ — and,  because  these  features  had  been 
retained,  Hosea  insisted  that  their  worship  was  not  a 
worship  of  Yahweh,  but  of  Baal,  and  a  constant  viola- 
tion of  their  covenant  with  the  God  of  their  fathers.* 
Thus  Hosea  followed  the  earlier  prophets  in  finding  an 
ethical  basis  for  the  Hebrew  religion  in  a  covenant 
between  Yahweh  and  his  people,  but  he  put  the  thought 
into  a  new  form  which  his  successors,  especially  Jeremiah 
and  Ezekiel,  further  developed.^ 

The  prophet  Hosea  had  something  to  say  on  various 
other  ethical  topics  of  a  special  character.  He  con- 
demned as  severely  as  Amos  the  obscene  and  drunken 
orgies  that  accompanied  the  corrupt  'worship  of  the 
time.-*  His  teaching  with  reference  to  the  family  is 
especially  interesting.  Not  that  he  lays  down  any  rules 
on  the  proper  conduct  of  its  members  one  toward 
another.  He  does  nothing  of  the  kind,  but  he  tells  the 
experience  of  a  husband  and  father  of  the  highest  type, 
himself,  and  thus  most  powerfully  impresses  the  serious 
reader.  He  probably  procured  his  wife  in  the  usual  way, 
by  virtual  purchase,  but  he  must  have  loved  her  very 
fondly  from  the  first.  Yet,  when  he  discovered  that 
she  was  untrue  to  him,  her  conduct  and  character 
seem  to  have  been  so  revolting  to  him  that  he  banished 
her  from  his  home.  Finally,  however,  his  affection 
for  her  reasserted  itself,  and,  although  he  had  no  proof 
that  she  was  even  penitent,  in  defiance  of  custom  and 
public  opinion^  he  redeemed  her  from  one  of  her  lovers 

^  I  Kings  12:26  flf.  '♦Hos.  4:10,  i3f. 

*Hos.  2:13.  sHos.  3:1. 

sjer.  3:1  ff.;  Ezek.  16:1  ff. 


I30       THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

and  again  took  her  under  his  protection.'  In  so  doing 
he  set  an  example  of  conjugal  charity  in  which  he 
himself  could  not  but  see  the  divine  compassion 
mirrored.^ 

The  prophecies  of  Hosea  also  reveal  the  ideal  father. 
There  is  nothing  to  indicate  what  he  did  with  the  children 
that  Gomer  had  borne  when  he  learned  that  they  were 
the  offspring  of  adultery.  His  first  impulse  would  be  to 
send  them  to  their  mother,  but  they  seem  to  have  found 
a  place  in  his  heart  from  which,  when  the  time  came,  he 
could  not  eject  them.  "How  then,"  he  said,  "can 
Yahweh  give  up  Ephraim,  and  cast  off  Israel?''^  Thus 
his  own  heart  taught  him  to  hope  that  Yahweh,  having 
found  a  way  to  save  his  people,  would  "heal  their 
backslidings "  and  once  more  "love  them  freely. "^ 

The  unfaithfulness  of  Gomer  was  nothing  rare  or 
strange  in  Israel.  The  prophet  says  that  adultery  was 
as  common  as  swearing,  and  both  were  universal  ;s 
and  naturally,  since  prostitution  was  a  religious  insti- 
tution and  women  were  taught  that  there  was  no  way 
in  which  they  could  better  please  the  gods  for  whom 
they  had  forsaken  Yahweh  than  by  the  sacrifice  of 
their  virtue.  It  was  these  conditions  that  gave  Hosea 
a  double  warrant  for  calling  the  popular  religion 
harlotry.^ 

A  prophet  who  laid  so  much  stress  upon  faithful- 
ness to  Yahweh  would  naturally  require  men  to  stand 
by  their  engagements  with  one  another.  It  is  not 
strange,  therefore,  to  find  him  complaining  that  there 
is  no  faithfulness  in  the  land,  but  that  the  inhabitants 

^Hos.  3:if.  3Hos.  ii:8f.  sRos.  4:2;  7:4. 

»Hos.  2:19.  '♦Hos.  14:4.  *Hos.4:iiff. 


HOSEA  AND  HIS  TIMES  131 

generally  give  their  oaths  only  to  break  them/  He 
accuses  his  people,  too,  of  fraud  and  deception.  Like 
their  wily  ancestor,  Jacob,  they  practice  dishonesty 
in  business  and  boast  of  the  success  of  their  devices.^ 
Naturally,  they  are  as  deceitful  and  treacherous  in 
pubUc  as  in  private  affairs.  Hence  the  frequent  and 
sudden  changes  in  their  rulers. ^  Nor  is  this  all.  Not 
content  with  cheating  one  another  in  trade,  they  actually 
steal  from  one  another,  sneaking  into  private  houses  or 
more  boldly  attacking  one  another  on  the  street  or  the 
highway .4  Their  leaders  are  their  teachers  in  these 
outrages,  their  princes  being  "like  them  that  remove 
the  landmark"  ;5  and  their  priests  not  scrupling  to 
murder  whom  they  would  plunder.^  Hosea  condemns 
this  or  any  other  kind  of  violence.  In  this  respect  he 
differs  from  some  of  his  predecessors.  The  difference 
appears  in  1:4.  This  verse  contains  a  reference  to  the 
revolution  wrought  by  Jehu.  That  movement,  it  will 
be  remembered,  was  ordered  by  Yahweh,?  foretold, 
with  all  its  horrors,  by  Elijah,^  and  initiated  when  Jehu 
was  anointed  by  a  disciple  of  Elisha.'  It  also,  as  has 
been  shown,  had  the  approval  of  Jehonadab  the  son  of 

*  Hos.  4:1. 

»Hos.  12:4,  8f. 

3  Hos.  7:35.  In  vs.  3  the  original  reading,  according  to  Wellhausen, 
was,  "They  anoint  a  king  in  their  wickedness,  and  princes  by  their 
deceptions." 

4Hos.  4:2;   7:1. 

sHos.  5:10.  Here  and  in  vss.  12,  13,  and  14  for  "Judah"  read 
"Israel,"  and  in  vs.  11  "Ephraim  oppresseth  and  crusheth  justice." 
See  the  Greek  Version. 

''Hos.  6:9.  8 1  Kings  21:21  fif. 

7 1  Kings  19 :  16.  » II  Kings  9 :  i  fif. 


132        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

Rechab  and  his  zealots/  Hosea,  however,  evidently 
regarded  it  as  contrary  to  the  divine  will,  in  fact  a 
crime,  making  Yahweh  say  that  he  will  "avenge  the 
blood  of  Jezreel  upon  the  house  of  Jehu."^  There  could 
not  be  a  better  example  of  ethical  development. 

Thus  far  the  teaching  of  Hosea  has  been  mostly 
negative.  He  does  not,  however,  always  deal  in  pro- 
hibitions. There  are  two  passages  in  which  he  makes 
positive  demands.  In  Hos.  6:6  he  represents  Yahweh 
as  sa3dng,  ''I  desire  goodness,  and  not  sacrifice,  and  the 
knowledge  of  God  more  than  burnt  offerings."  The 
word  here  rendered  "goodness"  by  the  American 
Revisers  should  be  translated  "kindness,"  as  in  the 
margin,  since  it  is  intended  to  denote,  not  personal 
excellence,  but  a  benevolent  and  beneficent  demeanor. 
This  appears  more  clearly  in  the  second  of  the  passages 
mentioned,  lo:  12,  where  the  prophet  exhorts  his  people, 
"Sow  to  yourselves  righteousness  and  reap  kindness." 
The  parallel  word,  here  rendered  "righteousness,"  is 
one  that  is  constantly  used  of  benevolent  activity, 
especially  on  the  part  of  the  Deity.  See  Ps.  36: 10  and 
103:17,  where  both  words  evidently  have  the  same 
sense,  but  especially  Ps.  24:6,  where  righteousness  is  a 
sjmonym  of  "blessing"  and  "salvation."^  The  gist 
of  the  passage,  therefore,  is  that  the  fundamental 
requirement  of  social  ethics  is  a  good-will  that  reveals 
itself  in  a  corresponding  activity  for  the  common  well- 
being. 

*  II  Kings  10:  IS  ff.  *  Hos.  1:4. 

3  In  modern  Hebrew  the  word  for  "righteousness"  is  used  in  the 
plural  to  denote  alms. 


CHAPTER  XI 

ISAIAH  AND  MICAH,  AND  THEIR  TIMES 

I.      ISAIAH 

It  was  in  the  year  of  Uzziah's  death,  probably 
735  B.C.,  that  Isaiah  received  his  call  to  the  office  of 
pfdphet.'  '  Jotham  had  then  for  about  fifteen  years 
been  regent  of  Judah,  his  father,  who  was  a  leper, 
being  incapacitated  for  public  affairs.*  He  reigned 
only  a  year  in  his  own  right,  then,  in  734  B.C.,  he  was 
followed  by  his  son  Ahaz.  The  latter  is  said  to  have 
reigned  only  sixteen  years,^  but  since,  according  to 
II  Kings  18:13,  Hezekiah  cannot  have  come  to  the 
throne  before  714  B.C.,  he  must  have  ruled  until  that 
time,  or  about  twenty-one  years.  The  reign  of  Hezekiah 
lasted  twenty-nine  years,  or  until  688  B.C.,  when  he  was 
succeeded  by  Manasseh,  under  whom,  says  tradition, 
Isaiah  suffered  martyrdom. 

These  were  eventful  years  for  both  of  the  Hebrew 
kingdoms.  That  of  Israel  had  for  some  time  been 
paying  tribute  to  Assyria,  but  in  735  there  was  a  revolu- 
tion in  which  Pekah,  an  officer  in  the  army,  overthrew 
Pekahiah  the  son  of  Menahem  and  took  possession  of 
the  vacant  throne.  This  Pekah  was  a  Gileadite,  and 
probably  represented  a  patriotic  party  opposed  to  the 
policy  of  submission  to  Assyria.  At  any  rate,  Pekah 
at  once  refused  to  pay  tribute,  and  entered  into  an 
alliance  with  Resin  of  Syria  and  other  neighboring 
rulers  for  the  purpose  of  maintaining  their  independence. 

^  Isa.  6 : 1  ff.  » II  Kings  15:5.  3 II  Kings  16 :  i. 

133 


134        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

Ahaz  seems  to  have  refused  to  join  the  coalition.  Pekah 
and  Resin,  therefore,  undertook  to  force  him  into  it. 
Thereupon  he  appealed  to  Tiglath-pileser,  who,  before 
the  end  of  734  B.C.,  invaded  Palestine  and,  after  wasting 
parts  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  drove  Hanno  the  king 
of  Gaza  into  exile  in  Egypt.  At  the  end  of  three  years 
he  had  conquered  Syria  and  compelled  all  the  rest  of 
the  rebellious  states  to  acknowledge  his  sovereignty.^ 

When,  in  727  B.C.,  Tiglath-pileser  died,  there  was 
another  revolt  in  the  West,  but  when  Shalmaneser  IV, 
his  successor,  appeared  on  the  scene,  Hoshea,  the  then 
king  of  Israel,  promptly  submitted.*  The  next  year, 
however,  he  rebelled  again,  and  this  time,  relying  on  the 
help  of  Egypt,  he  persisted  until  he  was  defeated  and 
captured,^  and  his  capital,  Samaria,  invested  by  an 
Assyrian  army.  Then  suddenly  Shalmaneser  IV  died; 
but  Sargon  II  took  his  place  and  pressed  the  siege  so 
successfully  that  in  722  B.C.  he  took  the  city  and  carried 
into  captivity  thousands  of  its  inhabitants.^  This 
seemed  to  be  the  end  of  the  Northern  Kingdom,  but 
in  720  B.C.  the  survivors  joined  a  league  headed  by  the 
king  of  Hamath,  and  Sargon  had  to  make  another 
expedition  to  the  shore  of  the  Mediterranean,  where  he 
first  subdued  the  northern  peoples,  and  then,  moving 
southward,  met  the  PhiHstines  and  the  Egyptians  at 
Raphia  and  so  thoroughly  defeated  them  that  they  made 
no  further  resistance. 

There  is  nothing  to  show  that  Judah  took  any  part 
in  these  uprisings.  Indeed,  so  long  as  Ahaz  lived  he 
and  his  people  seem  faithfully  to  have  kept  the  pledges 

'  II  Kings  16:9.  » II  Kings  17:4. 

2 II  Kings  17:3.  <  II  Kings  17:5!. 


ISAIAH  AND  MICAH,  AND  THEIR  TIMES       135 

made  at  the  beginning  of  his  reign  to  obtain  Ass3Tian 
assistance.  When,  however,  in  714  B.C.,  Hezekiah 
came  to  the  throne,  he  adopted  a  different  policy. 
In  711  he  took  part  in  a  movement  started  by  the  king 
of  Ashdod,  and  it  was  only  by  promptly  withdrawing 
from  the  coalition  that  he  escaped  the  pmiishment 
which  Sargon  II  inflicted  upon  his  confederates. 

The  revolt  of  711  B.C.  ought  to  have  taught  Hezekiah 
wisdom,  but  it  did  not  prevent  him  from  taking  advan- 
tage of  the  confusion  into  which  the  death  of  Sargon  in 
705  threw  the  Assyrian  empire  to  assert  his  independence. 
He  was  encouraged  so  to  do  by  the  king  of  Egypt,  and 
at  first  he  seemed  to  have  succeeded;  but  in  701  Sen- 
nacherib, the  son  and  successor  of  Sargon,  having 
established  his  authority  in  other  quarters,  turned  his 
attention  to  the  West.  He  invaded  Phoenicia  and 
reduced  its  cities  so  rapidly  that  many  of  the  neighbor- 
ing peoples  voluntarily  returned  to  their  allegiance. 
Hezekiah  and  some  of  the  PhiHstines,  relying  on  the 
promises  of  the  Egyptians,  continued  in  rebellion. 
When  the  Assyrian  king  was  ready  to  move  southward 
he  first  attacked  and  captured  Ashkelon.  Then,  as 
he  was  besieging  Ekron,  the  Egyptians  made  their 
appearance;  but  Sennacherib  met  and  defeated  them 
at  Eltekeh,  and  then,  returning,  took  the  Philistine 
city  and  severely  punished  its  inhabitants  for  their 
stubbornness.  Finally,  he  sent  a  part  of  his  army  to 
ravage  Judah,  while  he  himself,  with  the  main  body, 
proceeded  to  Lachish.  When  Hezekiah  saw  his  country 
wasted,  and  the  Assyrian  soldiery  at  the  very  gates  of 
Jerusalem,  he  made  haste  to  beg  for  mercy,  pay  a 
heavy   indemnity,    and   bind    himself    thenceforth    to 


136        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

render  a  corresponding  annual  tribute.  Later,  as 
Sennacherib  was  moving  upon  Egypt,  his  army  was 
overtaken  by  a  mysterious  disaster,  and  he  returned  to 
Assyria;  but  he  retained  his  hold  on  Palestine,  and  the 
Judean  king  remained  his  vassal. 

These  events  were  watched  by  the  prophet  Isaiah 
with  the  deepest  interest  and  made  the  occasion  for 
warning,  encouragement,  or  instruction,  whichever  he 
at  any  time  felt  impelled  to  utter.  Thus,  he  warned 
Ahaz  not  to  appeal  to  Tiglath-pileser  against  Pekah 
and  Resin,  assuring  him  that,  if  he  had  the  faith  to 
wait,  he  would  see  his  enemies  overthrown  without 
taking  upon  himself  the  Assyrian  yoke.^  He  took 
accoimt  of  the  growing  corruption  and  disorder  in 
Israel,  and  foretold  the  speedy  destruction  of  that 
kingdom.^  He  perceived,  as  few,  if  any,  others  did, 
the  unreliability  of  the  Egyptians,  and  warned  the 
Philistines,  as  well  as  his  own  people,  not  to  trust  in 
such  an  ally.^  To  the  end  he  insisted  that,  if  the  Jews 
put  their  trust  in  Yahweh  alone,  they  would  need  no 
other  defense.  Hence,  when  Sennacherib  threatened 
Jerusalem,  his  counsel  was,  ^'By  sitting^  still  shall 
ye  be  saved;  in  quiet  and  confidence  shall  be  your 
strength.  "5  Meanwhile,  like  Amos,  with  whose  prophe- 
cies he  was  evidently  familiar,  he  sought  to  dispel  the 
errors  and  banish  the  corruption  that  prevailed  in  his 
day,  and  prepare  his  people  for  the  acme  of  happiness 
and  prosperity  under  an  ideal  ruler,  the  mirror  and 

^Isa.  7:45.  'Isa.  9:7  ff. 

sisa.  20:35.;  30:1  ff.;  31: iff. 

4  The  reading  of  the  received  text,  "returning"  is  a  palpable  error 
due  to  the  close  similarity  of  two  Hebrew  verbs  elsewhere,  also,  mis- 
taken for  each  other.    See  Isa.  1:27. 

sisa.  30:15. 


ISAIAH  AND  MICAH,  AND  THEIR  TIMES       137 

instriunent  of  the  divine  will,  for  whose  advent  in  the 
near  future  he  taught  them  to  look  and  labor.' 

Isaiah  was  keenly  sensitive  to  ethical  values.  This 
appears  in  his  account  of  his  call,  6 :  i  ff .  That  passage, 
however,  has  often  been  misunderstood.  The  word 
"holy"  as  there  appHed  to  Yahweh  does  not  mean 
morally  perfect,  but  absolutely  transcendent  with 
reference  to  everything  j&nite,  and  therefore  worthy  of 
universal  reverence  and  adoration.  Hence,  "the  Holy 
One  of  Israel,'*  a  phrase  that  seems  to  have  originated 
with  Isaiah,  is  equivalent  to  "the  God  of  Israel." 
The  result  of  the  manifestation  of  this  holiness,  or,  as 
Paul  puts  it,  "his  eternal  power  and  divinity,"  is  the 
"glory"  with  which,  Isaiah  declares,  "the  whole  earth 
is  full."  When  the  prophet  saw  it  he  was  overwhelmed 
and  condemned  himself,  a  mere  man,  with  the  imper- 
fections of  a  man,  for  taking  upon  his  lips,  as  in  the  act 
of  worship  he  had  just  done,  the  name  of  so  exalted  a 
being.  "Woe  is  me,"  he  says,  "for  I  am  undone, 
because  I  am  a  man  of  imclean  lips." 

A  man  thus  sensitive  would  naturally  insist  upon 
personal  morality  in  other  worshipers  of  Yahweh. 
It  is  not  strange,  therefore,  to  find  him,  in  the  fifth 
chapter  of  his  prophecies,  where  he  catalogues  the 
crying  evils  of  his  day,  making  especially  prominent 
the  abuse  of  wine  and  other  means  of  intoxication. 
"Woe,"  he  exclaims,  "to  them  that  rise  early  in  the 
morning  to  pursue  strong  drink;  and  tarry  late  in  the 
evening   until   wine   inflames  them."^    A  little  later, 

^  Isa.  9:1  ff.;    ii:i  ff. 

»Isa.  5:11.  The  word  here  rendered  "inflame"  sometimes  has 
the  sense  of  "chase"  (Gen.  31:36),  a  fact  that  the  prophet  must  have 
had  in  mind  when  he  selected  it  for  this  connection. 


138        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

namely,  in  vs.  22,  he  pronounces  a  second  "woe" 
upon  drunkards,  or,  as  he  describes  them,  those  who 
are  "mighty — to  drink  wine"  and  "men  of  strength — 
to  mingle  strong  drink."  In  chap.  28  he  returns  to 
the  subject  in  one  of  the  most  scathing  utterances  to 
be  found  in  his  prophecies.  He  first  recalls  a  passage 
in  which  he  has  described  Samaria  as  "the  proud 
crown  of  the  drunkards  of  Ephraim,"^  and  then 
pictures  the  dissolute  habits  of  the  priests  and  prophets 
of  Judah.^ 

Isaiah  was  doubtless  as  severe  in  his  condemnation 
of  unchastity  as  of  drunkenness,  but  there  is  nowhere 
in  his  extant  prophecies  a  direct  reference  to  this  evil; 
for,  in  1:10,  the  rulers  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  are 
the  leaders  in  a  city  threatened  with  a  destruction  as 
complete  as  that  of  the  cities  of  the  Plain;  and  in  1:21, 
as  appears  from  the  context,  Jerusalem  is  called  a  harlot, 
as  an  abode,  not  of  impurity,  but  of  injustice.^  The 
absence  of  such  references  can  hardly  mean  that  the 
prophet  had  no  occasion  for  them,  but  must  be  explained 
as  due  to  the  incompleteness  of  the  record  of  his 
utterances. 

In  his  ethical  teaching  Isaiah  concerns  himself  chiefly 
with  social  conditions.  In  his  day  they  were  much  the 
same  in  Judah  as  they  had  been  in  Israel  when  Amos 
prophesied.  There  had  been  so  great  an  increase  in 
wealth  that  the  land  seemed  to  be  "full  of  silver  and 
gold, "4  but  this  wealth  was  so  unevenly  distributed  that 
the  poor  were  about  as  nimierous  and  miserable  as  ever. 
Moreover,   matters  were   growing  worse   rather   than 

^  Vs.  I.  3  See  also  vss.  26  f, 

?  Vss.  7  f .  *  Isa.  2 : 7. 


ISAIAH  AND  MICAH,  AND  THEIR  TIMES       139 

better,  through  the  fault,  as  Isaiah  believed,  of  the  upper 
classes.  In  the  first  place,  prosperity,  instead  of  bringing 
contentment,  had  only  whetted  their  appetite  for  gain, 
and  they  were  adding  *' house  to  house  and  field  to  field" 
so  rapidly  that  it  seemed  as  if  they  would  soon  "dwell 
alone  in  the  midst  of  the  land";  in  other  words,  having 
dispossessed  the  small  owners,  they  covered  the  coimtry 
with  their  large  estates.^  Isaiah  justly  condemned  such 
a  policy. 

The  prophet  also  charges  the  rulers  of  his  people 
with  adding  to  their  wealth  by  robbing  the  poor.  In 
the  name  of  Yahweh  he  declares,  "It  is  ye  who  have 
cropped  the  vineyard,"  that  is,  robbed  those  whom  they 
should  have  protected;  "the  spoil  of  the  poor  is  in  your 
houses.  What  mean  ye,  that  ye  crush  my  people,  and 
grind  the  faces  of  the  poor  ?  saith  Yahweh  of  Hosts. "^ 
A  favorite  method  with  the  robbers  in  Isaiah^s,  as  in 
Amos'  day,  was  to  bring  suit  against  the  intended 
victim  and  bribe  the  judge  with  a  share  in  the  proceeds 
of  their  joint  knavery.  Cases  of  this  sort  were  so 
frequent  in  Judah  in  the  time  of  Isaiah  that  justice 
became  a  by-word.  Addressing  Jerusalem,  he  says,  "Thy 
princes  are  unprincipled.  They  all  love  a  bribe,  chase 
after  fees;  and,  as  for  the  cause  of  the  widow,  it  doth 
not  reach  them."^  One  of  his  woes  is  directed  against 
those  that  "acquit  the  guilty  for  a  bribe,  while  the 
innocent  they  rob  of  his  innocence."^  In  another  he 
describes  the  same  class  as  those  who  "record  iniquitous 
judgments,  and  the  writers  that  engross  trouble;  turn- 
ing the  lowly  from  judgment  and  robbing  the  afflicted 

*  Isa.  5:8.  3  Isa.  1 :  23. 

*  Isa.  3 :  14  f.  4  Isa.  5 :  23. 


I40        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

among  my  people  of  justice;  so  that  widows  are  their 
prey,  and  orphans  their  plunder."'  This  was  the  great 
evil  of  the  times.  When,  therefore,  Isaiah  undertook 
to  define  rehgion,  his  formula  was,  not  a  tariff  of  sacri- 
fices, but  the  exhortation,  ''Seek  justice,  correct  the 
oppressor,  judge  the  orphan,  defend  the  widow ";^  and, 
when  he  was  required  to  propose  a  remedy  for  the  ills 
that  had  befallen  his  people,  he  declared  that  Zion  must 
be  "redeemed  by  justice,  and  they  that  dwell  therein 
through  righteousness.  "3  He  insisted  that  there  was 
nothing  but  trouble  in  store  for  those  who  called  "evil 
good,  and  good  evil,"  reversing  the  dictates  of  ordinary 
morality.  It  was  as  foolish  and  disastrous,  he  said,  as 
to  put  "darkness  for  light,  and  light  for  darkness," 
or  "bitter  for  sweet,  and  sweet  for  bitter."'* 

The  ideal  that  Isaiah  set  before  his  generation,  and 
bequeathed  to  those  that  followed,  involved  the  same 
doctrine.  This  ideal  is  presented  in  the  messianic 
passages  properly  attributed  to  him.  The  prophecy  in 
7:14,  to  which  a  messianic  interpretation  is  given  by  a 
later  writer  in  Mic.  5:3,  as  well  as  Matt.  1:23,  is  not 
such  a  passage;  for  the  woman  there  mentioned  is  not 
a  virgin,  but  any  yoimg  woman  who  may  bear  a  son 
at  the  end  of  the  usual  period,  while  the  child  has  no 
definite  character  and  no  fimction  except  by  his  name 
to  register  the  passage  of  the  Syrian  crisis.  The  famous 
utterance  in  9:5  f.,  on  the  other  hand,  is  genuinely 
messianic  in  character,  that  is  to  say,  it  forecasts  a  new 
era  and  describes  a  person  whom,  when  the  time  comes, 
Yahweh  can  use  for  the  accomplishment  of  his  purpose 

'Isa.  10:1.  »Isa.  1:27. 

'  Isa.  1:17.  <Isa.  5:20. 


ISAIAH  AND  MICAH,  AND  THEIR  TIMES       141 

concerning  his  people.  He  will  have  great  power  and 
achieve  wonderful  success,  but  the  aim  and  glory  of  his 
administration  will  be,  not  his  own  aggrandizement,  but 
the  establishment  "by  justice  and  righteousness"  of  the 
kingdom  of  David  for  all  time  to  come. 

The  same  ideal  is  more  fully  set  forth  in  11: iff. 
Here,  again,  the  hope  of  the  Chosen  People  is  in  a  scion 
of  the  house  of  David,  whose  union  and  communion 
with  Yahweh  will  be  so  intimate  that  he  will  have  the 
resources  of  divinity  at  his  command,  and  here,  again, 
his  chief  function  is  the  administration  of  justice. 
"In  righteousness  shall  he  judge  the  lowly,  and  with 
equity  decide  for  the  humble  of  the  land;  and  he  shall 
smite  the  violent  with  the  rod  of  his  mouth,  and  with 
the  breath  of  his  lips  he  shall  slay  the  godless.  Yea, 
righteousness  shall  be  the  girdle  of  his  loins,  and  faith- 
fulness the  cincture  of  his  reins."  The  great  command- 
ment, then,  in  Isaiah's  eyes  is  justice,  impartial  and 
unfailing.  Thus  it  appears  that  the  teaching  of  Isaiah 
was  practically  that  of  Amos,  except  that,  while  Amos 
despaired  of  Israel,  Isaiah  believed  that  the  condition  on 
which  alone  Yahweh  would  or  could  bless  Judah  would 
one  day  be  fulfilled. 

The  acquaintance  of  Isaiah  with  the  prophecies  of 
Amos  has  been  mentioned.  The  truth  is,  that  the 
former,  in  his  earlier  utterances,  so  clearly  follows  the 
latter  in  style  as  well  as  in  content  that  he  may  fairly 
be  called  a  disciple  of  the  shepherd  of  Tekoa.  Nor 
does  he,  on  the  points  on  which  it  is  possible  to  compare 
the  two,  go  much,  if  any,  beyond  his  predecessor.  It  is 
strange  that  this  should  be  true  of  their  attitude  toward 
foreigners.    Amos    recognized    them    as    creatures    of 


142        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

Yahweh,  guided  by  him  in  their  history,  and  responsible 
to  him  for  their  conduct  toward  one  another,  as  well 
as  toward  the  Hebrews.  He  did  not  have  occasion  to 
express  himself  with  reference  to  their  future.  If  he 
had,  he  could  hardly  have  shown  less  interest  in  their 
fate  than  does  Isaiah.  Indeed,  the  latter,  although, 
Hke  Amos,  he  represents  the  Assyrians  as  instruments 
of  Yahweh,'  when  he  comes  to  portray  the  future  in 
9: 2  ff.  and  II :  I  ff.,^  assigns  them  no  share  in  the  bless- 
ings his  people  will  enjoy  under  the  beneficent  rule  of 
the  Prince  of  Peace.^ 

2.    mcAH 

The  book  of  Micah  begins  with  an  oracle  against 
Israel,  and  3:12,  according  to  Jer.  26:18,  was  uttered 
in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah.  This  prophet,  therefore,  was 
a  contemporary  of  Isaiah  and  had  practically  the  same 
conditions  as  a  backgroimd  for  his  prophecies.  There 
was,  however,  this  difference  in  their  points  of  view,  that, 
whereas  Isaiah  seems  to  have  been  a  native,  or,  at  least, 
a  resident,  of  Jerusalem,  Micah's  home  was  in  the 
country,  and  his  training,  like  that  of  Amos,  outside 
the  immediate  influence  of  the  capital.  It  would  have 
been  strange,  therefore,  if  he  had  not  condemned  the 
evils  of  his  time,  when  he  came  to  realize  their  serious- 
ness, even  more  severely  than  Isaiah,  and  expressed 
himself  less  optimistically  with  reference  to  the  future 
of  their  common  race  and  country. 

^  Isa.  10:5  f. 

=»  It  is  taken  for  granted  that  these  passages  were  written  by  Isaiah, 
although,  as  is  well  known,  there  are  scholars  who  deny  their  genuineness. 
'In  Isa.  11:4,  for  "earth"  read  "land"  in  both  cases. 


ISAIAH  AND  MICAH,  AND  THEIR  TIMES       143 

Micah  does  not  undertake  to  picture,  as  did  Isaiah, 
the  disgusting  excesses  of  his  people,  but  he  clearly 
enough  intimates  that  driinkenness  was  very  prevalent 
and  that  he  had  as  little  patience  with  it  as  his  colleague; 
for,  in  replying  to  an  attempt  to  silence  him,  he  says, 
"If  one  came  to  them  whom  a  false  spirit  had  misled, 
saying,  I  will  prophesy  to  thee  of  wine  and  strong 
drink,  he  would  be  the  prophet  of  this  people."^  So 
largely  was  their  life  occupied  and  dominated  by  their 
unnatural  appetites. 

Micah  reminds  Samaria  of  its  imfaithfulness,*  but 
in  the  social  world  the  evil  above  all  others  was  the 
prostitution  of  justice,  the  result  of  insatiable  lust  for 
gain.  The  prophet  accuses  the  rulers  of  an  utter  dis- 
regard for  right  and  wrong  in  their  relations  with  their 
less  wealthy  or  powerful  neighbors.  "Is  it  not,''  he 
indignantly  demands,  "yours  to  know  justice?  ye 
who  hate  good  and  love  evil,  who  tear  their  skins  off 
them,  and  their  flesh  off  their  bones."^  The  injustice 
practiced  is  not  the  result  of  caprice  or  passion,  but  a 
deliberate  policy.  These  recreant  rulers  * '  devise  iniquity 
on  their  beds,"  and,  "when  morning  breaks,  practice 
it,  because  it  is  within  their  power."  Thus,  "they 
covet  fields  and  seize  them;  and  houses,  and  take  them 
away"  from  their  proper  owners;  "and  they  oppress 
a  man  and  his  house,  yea,  a  man  and  his  heritage.  "^ 
They  treat  their  own  people  worse  than  foreigners  and 
enemies,  robbing  them  without  provocation,  separating 
the  women  from  their  tender  children,  and  finally 
depriving  the  children  themselves  of  their  heritage  in 

^Mic.  2:11.  3Mic.  3:if. 

»Mic.  1:5.  ''Mic.  2:1  f. 


144        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

Yahweh  by  selling  them  as  slaves  into  foreign  countries.' 
In  3:95.  he  couples  the  priests  and  the  prophets  with 
the  rulers  in  a  scathing  indictment:  "Hear  this,  I  pray 
you,  ye  chiefs  of  the  house  of  Jacob,  and  rulers  of  the 
house  of  Israel;  who  abhor  justice,  and  pervert  all 
equity;  who  build  Zion  with  blood,  and  Jerusalem  with 
iniquity.  Its  chiefs  decide  for  a  bribe,  and  its  priests 
teach  for  a  price,  and  its  prophets  divine  for  money." 
These  last  say,  because  they  are  hired  so  to  do,  "Is 
not  Yahweh  in  the  midst  of  us?  There  shall  no  evil 
come  upon  us."  They  are  the  special  objects  of  the 
prophet's  contempt  and  sarcasm.  It  is  theirs  above  all 
others  to  discern  between  right  and  wrong,  clearly  to 
commend  the  one  and  condemn  the  other,  and  in  case 
of  need  to  defend  any  who  are  denied  their  rights  against 
their  oppressors.  Yet  they,  too,  close  their  eyes  to 
obvious  wrongs  and  the  consequences — ^for  a  considera- 
tion, or,  to  put  it  with  all  Micah's  bluntness,  "when  they 
have  something  to  bite  with  their  teeth  they  cry,  Peace; 
but  against  him  who  putteth  not  into  their  mouths 
they  declare  war."^ 

These  are  the  false  prophets,  over  against  whom 
Micah  places  the  genuine  man  of  (k)d,  taking  himself 
for  an  illustration.  "But  I,"  he  says,  "am  full  of 
strength,  and  justice,  and  courage  to  declare  to  Jacob 
his  transgression,  and  to  Israel  his  sin."^  Only  a  man 
conscious  of  rectitude  could  thus  have  invited  scrutiny 
and  criticism;  but  he  boldly  hurls  this  challenge  to  his 
adversaries,  firm  in  his  moral  integrity,  keen  in  his  moral 
vision,  and  brave  enought  to  accept,  proclaim,  and 
defend  his  moral  judgments,  an  ideal  prophet  of  the 
Old  Testament. 

'Mic.  2:8f.  »Mic.  3:5.  JMic.  3:8. 


ISAIAH  AND  MICAH,  AND  THEIR  TIMES       145 

Thus  far  references  have  been  made  only  to  the 
first  three  chapters  of  the  book  that  bears  the  name  of 
Micah,  the  reason  being  that  some  modern  critics 
doubt  or  deny  the  genuineness  of  the  remaining  four. 
The  question  need  not  be  discussed  in  this  connection, 
since  it  is  only  6 :  i — 7 : 6  that  contains  anything  material 
to  the  present  purpose,  and  there  is  nothing  of  ethical 
significance  in  this  section  that  has  not  already  been 
foimd  current  with  other  prophets.  The  passage  will 
best  be  imderstood  as  a  representation  of  the  condition 
of  northern  Palestine  just  before,  or  after,  the  over- 
throw of  Samaria,  or,  as  6:13  puts  it,  when  Yahweh 
had  "begun  to  smite"  the  offender.  The  chastisement 
already  inflicted  has  not  borne  fruit.  This  the  nation 
personified  confesses  in  7:1  ff.,  saying  that  "the  pious 
man  hath  vanished  from  the  land  (not  "earth"),  and 
there  is  not  an  upright  one  among  men."  The  ties  of 
nature  are  no  longer  respected.  Indeed,  so  demorahzed 
has  the  family  become  that  "a  man's"  most  dangerous 
"enemies  are  those  of  his  own  house."'  There  is  just 
as  little  confidence  to  be  placed  in  the  solemn  pledges 
of  friendship.^  As  for  business,  it  is  still,  as  in  the  time 
of  Amos,  but  a  transparent  mask  for  robbery.^  Thus 
every  man's  hand  is  against  every  other,  and  it  is  war 
to  the  death.''  The  rich  are  the  chief  offenders,  because 
they  always  have  it  in  their  power  to  do  evil,  if  not 
directly,  by  means  of  the  forms  of  law,  bribing  the 
judges  to  sanction  their  iniquities.^ 

All  this  is  more  obnoxious  to  Yahweh  than  to  the 
moral  sense  of  mankind.  What  then  does  he  require? 
This  question  finds  as  complete  an  answer  in  6:6-8  as 

*Mic.  7:6.  3Mic.  6:iif.  sMic.  7:3. 

'Mic.  7:5.  ^Mic.  7:2. 


146        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

anywhere  in  the  Hebrew  Scriptiires.  The  author  of 
this  passage,  Hke  Amos  and  Hosea,  had  to  combat  the 
notion  that  religion  was  a  matter  of  offerings,  and  that 
one  who  was  rich  enough  could  bribe  God  as  he  could 
an  earthly  judge.  There  were  those  who  were  willing 
to  pay  pretty  dearly  for  the  divine  favor,  as  when 
Mesha  sacrificed  his  eldest  son  to  Moloch/  This  idea  is 
dramatically  presented  in  the  question,  "Wherewithal 
shall  I  approach  Yahweh,  bow  before  God  on  high? 
Shall  I  approach  him  with  burnt  offerings,  with  calves 
a  year  old?  Will  Yahweh  be  pleased  with  thousands 
of  rams,  with  myriads  of  rivers  of  oil  ?  Shall  I  give  my 
first-born  for  my  transgressions,  the  fruit  of  my  body  for 
the  sin  of  my  soul?"  The  answer  puts  the  earthly, 
human  side  of  religion  first:  "He  hath  told  thee,  man, 
what  is  good;  and  what  doth  Yahweh  require  of  thee 
but  to  do  justly,  and  love  kindness,  and  walk  humbly 
with  thy  God  ?"^ 

I II  Kings  3:27. 

*  Amos  5:21  ff.;  Isa.  1:10  fit. 


"N 


CHAPTER  XII 

SECONDARY  ELEMENTS  IN  THE  JUDEAN  AND 
EPHRAIMITE  NARRATIVES 

I.      THE   SECOND   YAHWIST  (j^)  IN   THE  EARLY  CHAPTERS 
OF  GENESIS 

In  a  previous  chapter  attention  was  called  to  the 
significance  of  the  Ephraimite  version  of  the  story  of 
Abimelech  the  son  of  Gideon/  in  which  the  doctrine  of 
divine  retribution  taught  by  Amos  is  distinctly  incul- 
cated. It  is  the  early  chapters  of  Genesis,  however, 
in  which  this  doctrine  is  set  forth  most  clearly  and 
impressively.  This  is  done,  in  the  first  place,  partly 
by  a  rearrangement  of  the  original  text  of  the  Judean 
narrative,  and  partly  by  additions  to  this  work  from 
a  later  one  by  a  writer  of  the  same  school. 

The  form  of  the  stories  with  which  the  Judean 
narrative  originally  began,  and  the  purpose  of  the  author 
in  his  use  of  them,  have  already  been  discussed.  They 
were  simply  current  stories  of  primeval  times,  selected 
for  their  literary  availability,  and  put  together  for  the 
amusement  or  instruction  of  those  who  had  a  literary 
or  patriotic  interest  in  the  traditional  lore  of  the  Hebrews. 
It  is  difiicult  to  determine  the  precise  order  in  which 
they  were  originally  arranged,  but  it  is  clear  that  9 :  20  ff . 
belongs  with  4:17-24  and  5:29.  When  the  Judean 
accoimt  of  the  Flood  was  inserted,  and  Noah  the  son 
of  Lemech  identified  with  the  hero  of  that  event,  the 
order  was  changed,  since  otherwise  the  favor  shown  the 

'Judg.  9:1-23,  42-57. 

147 


148        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

family  of  Noah,  including  Shem,  Japheth,  and  Canaan, 
would  have  seemed  without  justification.  At  the  same 
time,  by  the  insertion  of  the  story  of  Cain  and  Abel, 
there  was  produced  a  series  of  events  that  could  be 
interpreted  as  manifestations  of  the  deterioration  of 
hiunan  nature.  Thus,  the  third  chapter  became  a 
record  of  "man's  first  disobedience";  the  story  of 
Cain  and  AbeP  marked  the  advent  of  hatred  and  violence 
into  the  world;  the  Cainite  genealogy,  with  the  song 
of  Lemech,=*  illustrated  the  growing  neglect,  and  final 
repudiation,  of  God;  and  the  story  of  the  sons  of  God 
and  the  daughters  of  men^  registered  the  triumph  of 
lust  among  mankind.  To  such  a  history,  on  the  sup- 
position that  there  is  a  holy,  righteous,  and  omnipotent 
God,  as  Amos  taught,  the  only  fitting  sequel  was  a 
universal  catastrophe,  and  the  editor  who  made  the 
changes  noted  saw  in  an  early  deluge,  of  which  the 
Hebrews,  as  well  as  the  Babylonians,  had  preserved  a 
traditional  account,  the  instrumentality  by  which  the 
race  as  a  whole  was  obliterated.  This  seems  rather 
high-handed  and,  in  a  modern  writer,  would  justly  be 
condemned  as  unwarrantable  license.  The  author  in 
question,  however,  must  not  be  judged  by  the  same 
canons  as  modern  historians.  The  modern  historian 
goes  about  his  work  as  a  scientist  pursues  his  investi- 
gations. He  first  gathers  his  materials  and  carefully 
sifts  them,  allowing  no  fact  to  escape  him,  but  vigorously 
rejecting  any  alleged  event  that  does  not  at  least  square 
with  probability.  Then  he  arranges  his  data  in  chrono- 
logical order,  and  establishes  the  connection,  if  there 
is  any,  among  them.    Finally,  he  deduces  from  this 

'Gen.  4:  iff.  'Gen.  4:172.  s  Gen.  6:1  f.,  4. 


SECONDARY  ELEMENTS  IN  J  AND  E  149 

sequence  of  events  any  principles  which  they  illustrate, 
and  the  lessons  which  they  contain  for  his  own  or  future 
generations.  The  prophet — for  the  author  of  the  revised 
Judean  narrative  was  a  prophet  as  truly  as  was  Amos — 
did  not  go  about  his  task  in  that  way.  He  began  at  the 
other  end  of  the  process.  He  began  with  a  truth,  or 
something  that  he  believed  to  be  true,  and,  having  be- 
come convinced,  not  only  of  its  truth,  but  of  its  practical 
importance,  proceeded  to  illustrate  and  enforce  it.  He 
naturally  sought  his  illustrations  within  the  limits  of  the 
knowledge  of  those  whom  he  wished  to  influence.  If  they 
had  a  story  that  would  serve  his  purpose,  he  used  it,  un- 
disturbed by  the  question  whether  it  had  ever  before 
been  similarly  interpreted  or,  indeed,  whether  the  inci- 
dent described  was  real  or  fictitious.  It  was  enough 
for  him  that  by  means  of  it  he  could  bring  his  thought 
vividly  to  the  attention  of  his  readers.  When  he  had 
done  so  he  felt  that  he  could  trust  it,  with  the  help  of  the 
divine  Spirit,  to  take  care  of  itself.  In  the  present  instance 
the  important  truth  to  be  taught  was  the  central  doctrine 
of  the  Book  of  Amos,  that  there  is  a  supreme  Power, 
and  that  he  "works  for  righteousness,'^  or,  as  the 
Psalmist  more  picturesquely  puts  it,  "righteousness 
and  judgment  are  the  foundation  of  his  throne.'" 
This  being  his  message,  how  could  he  have  brought  it 
more  forcibly  home  to  a  violent  and  voluptuous  genera- 
tion than  by  the  (to  him)  godless  pride  of  Lemech  and  the 
unbridled  Hcense  of  fallen  sons  of  God  ?  And  how  could 
he  more  effectively  have  presented  the  terrible  conse- 
quences of  the  existing  corruption  than  by  rehearsing 
the  terrors  of  a  catastrophe  that  was  recognized  as 
^Ps.  97:2. 


ISO        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

marking  the  close  of  an  era  in  the  early  history  of  man- 
kind? There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  Judean  narra- 
tive in  the  revised  form,  though  less  interesting  from  the 
hterary  point  of  view,  was,  in  its  day,  a  more  useful 
vehicle  of  moral  and  rehgious  instruction  than  the 
original  work. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  go  into  a  more  detailed  analysis 
of  the  later  Judean  elements  in  the  early  chapters  of 
Genesis,  but  there  is  one  point  that  should  not  be 
overlooked,  an  inconsistency  that  is  both  curious  and 
instructive.  In  the  story  of  Cain  and  Abel  the  murderer 
complains  that  the  sentence  pronounced  upon  him  is 
too  severe,  and  Yahweh  sets  a  sign  upon  him  to  prevent 
anyone  from  putting  him  to  death.  It  has  always  been 
a  question  whom  Cain  feared,  but  this  is  not  the  only 
difficulty.  In  the  earliest  times  there  was  a  so-called 
"fa  talionis^^  according  to  which  it  was  the  duty  of  the 
next  of  kin  to  avenge  the  victim  of  a  murder  upon  the 
murderer.  Had  this  law  been  followed,  Cain  must 
have  died  for  his  crime;  but  Yahweh  intervened,  just 
as  David  did  in  the  case  of  the  son  of  the  widow  of 
Tekoa,'  and  the  hand  of  justice  was  stayed,  so  to  speak, 
by  the  exercise  of  "executive  clemency."  The  author 
of  the  story  would  probably  have  explained  that,  had 
Cain  been  put  to  death,  the  increase  and  development 
of  mankind  would  have  been  too  seriously  retarded. 

2.      LATER  JUDEAN  AND  EPHRAIMITE  ADDITIONS  BEFORE 
AND  DURING  COMPILATION 

The  additions  to  the  Judean  narrative  in  the  first 
eleven  chapters  of  Genesis,  as  explained  in  the  preceding 
section,  are  supposed  to  have  been  taken  mostly  from 

^n  Sam.  i4:iof. 


SECONDARY  ELEMENTS  IN  J  AND  E  151 

another  continuous  work.  There  are  other  passages  in 
this  narrative  that  seem  to  be  of  a  still  later  date,  and 
rather  redactional  in  character,  having  been  inserted 
from  time  to  time  while  it  had  a  separate  existence. 
The  Ephraimite  narrative  had  a  similar  history.  Finally, 
when  the  two  were  united,  the  compiler  took  upon  him- 
self, not  only  to  omit  from  the  one  or  the  other  in  certain 
places,  but  to  adapt  and  enlarge  to  suit  his  own  ideas  or 
convictions.  Thus  there  are  three  classes  of  supple- 
mentary matter,  but,  since  they  are  all  comparatively 
late  and  have  a  certain  resemblance,  making  it  difficult 
in  some  cases  to  classify  passages  with  respect  to  author- 
ship, they  may  all  be  discussed  under  one  general  head. 
First,  there  are  some  passages  of  which  it  may  pretty 
safely  be  asserted  that  they  belonged  to  the  Judean 
narrative  in  its  final  form.  Perhaps  the  most  interesting 
among  them  is  Gen.  i8:23b-33a.  These  verses,  which 
are  a  part  of  the  story  of  the  destruction  of  Sodom  and 
Gomorrah,  describe  how  Abraham  undertook  to  inter- 
cede for  the  threatened  cities,  especially  Sodom,  plead- 
ing that  there  might  be  a  niunber  of  righteous  persons 
among  its  inhabitants,  and  it  would  be  imjust  to  destroy 
them.  Yahweh  admits  the  plea  and  agrees  to  spare  the 
city  if  fifty  such  persons  can  be  found  there  to  furnish 
an  excuse  for  his  clemency.  The  patriarch,  having 
gained  so  much,  presses  his  case,  gradually  reducing 
the  required  number,  until  Yahweh  has  promised  to 
abandon  his  purpose  if  there  can  be  found  even  ten  who 
deserve  preservation.  The  passage  seems  to  be  an 
attempt  to  justify  the  divine  severity,  as  pictured  in  the 
original  story;  but  as  such  it  is  very  unsatisfactory, 
since,  in  the  first  place,  Yahweh  was  not  restricted  to 


152        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

the  alternatives  presented,  and,  secondly,  there  would 
have  been  as  little  justice  in  letting  the  unrepentant 
multitude  go  unpunished  as  in  destroying  with  them  a 
handful  who  did  not  deserve  such  a  fate.  The  under- 
lying doctrine  is  that  of  vicarious  righteousness,  which 
finally  became  a  favorite  one  with  the  Jews,^  but  which 
is  expressly  repudiated  by  Ezekiel  in  14: 13  f.,  where  he 
makes  Yahweh  say,  ''When  a  land  sinneth  against  me 
by  committing  a  trespass,  and  I  stretch  out  my  hand 
upon  it,  ...  .  though  these  three  men,  Noah,  Daniel, 
and  Job  were  in  it,  they  should  deliver  but  their  own 
souls  by  their  righteousness."  In  the  sequel  of  the  story 
of  the  cities  of  the  Plain,  according  to  the  original  author, 
Yahweh  is  represented  as  solving  the  problem  of  Sodom's 
fate  by  simply  separating  the  righteous  from  the  wicked 
and  rescuing  the  former  before  he  destroyed  the  latter. 

This  passage  betrays,  to  be  suie,  a  certain  degree 
of  ethical  uneasiness,  but  it  also  indicates  that  the 
author  lacked  the  moral  insight  that  characterized  the 
great  prophets  who  preceded  him.  The  same  is  true 
of  Exod.  33 :  18  f .,  if,  with  Paul,^  one  interprets  it  natu- 
rally as  a  general  declaration  to  the  effect  that  the  grace 
of  God  is  conditioned  only  by  his  sovereign  will.  See 
also  Exod.  34:6  f.,  where  a  still  later  hand  has  added 
the  qualifying  statement,  "and  that  doth  by  no  means 
clear,"  or,  better,  "doth  not  let  go  entirely  unpimished," 
"visiting  the  iniquity  of  the  fathers  upon  the  children 
and  upon  the  children's  children,  upon  the  third  and 
upon  the  fourth  generation."  It  would  seem,  therefore, 
as  if  the  old  prophets  had  done  their  work  too  well, 
creating  a  sense  of  indesert  so  deep  that  those  who  came 

» Weber,  ^Pr,  280  ff.  »  Rom.  9:15. 


SECONDARY  ELEMENTS  IN  J  AND  E         153 

after  them  could  find  reKef  from  it  only  in  a  doctrine 
of  arbitrary  and  unconditional  grace. 

One  of  the  things  that  the  Hebrews  seem  to  have  had 
on  their  collective  conscience  was  the  transfer  of  the 
royal  office  from  Saul  to  his  rival  David.  The  earlier 
records  make  clear  that  it  was  a  political  necessity, 
and  that  it  was  brought  about  with  as  little  rancour 
and  bloodshed  as  could  have  been  expected;  but  later 
writers  sought  excuses  for  it.  The  author  of  I  Sam. 
i3:7b-i5  is  one  of  them.  He  says  that  Saul  was 
rejected  because,  when  he  had  mustered  a  force  at 
Gilgal,  he  proceeded  with  his  preparations  for  war  and 
offered  a  presumably  customary  sacrifice  without  wait- 
ing for  Samuel;  but  the  weakness  of  this  explanation 
appears  when  one  considers  that  in  Saul's  time  it  was 
perfectly  proper  for  him  to  perform  such  a  rite;  that, 
if  one  was  necessary  before  beginning  the  campaign, 
it  was  high  time  to  perform  it,  since  the  Philistines 
were  preparing  an  attack,  while  Saul's  army  was  daily 
dwindling  before  his  eyes  in  anticipation  of  it;  and, 
finally,  that  Samuel,  who  had  promised  to  come  to 
Gilgal  by  a  certain  date,  had  failed  to  fulfil  his  engage- 
ment. There  is  some  doubt  about  these  alleged  facts, 
but  the  author  takes  them  for  granted,  and,  in  so  doing, 
challenges  the  judgment  of  the  reader,  who  will  hardly 
find  the  king  guilty  of  anything  deserving  the  severity 
with  which  the  prophet  is  reported  to  have  treated  him. 

The  secondary  matter  in  the  Ephraimite  narrative 
is  not  all  germane  to  the  present  discussion,  but  there 
are  various  passages  that  are,  and  these  should  not  be 
neglected.    The    first    passage    that    demands    special 


154        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

attention  is  the  story  of  the  elders  in  Num.  ii:i6f. 
and  24b-30.  It  is  remarkable  for  the  humility  and 
liberahty  therein  attributed  to  Moses,  who,  when  it 
was  reported  that  two  of  the  men  who  had  been  sum- 
moned to  the  tabernacle,  but  had  not  appeared,  had 
received  the  spirit  in  the  camp,  and  Joshua  proposed  to 
silence  them,  replied,  "Art  thou  jealous  for  my  sake? 
O  that  all  Yahweh's  people  were  prophets ;  that  Yahweh 
would  put  his  spirit  upon  them!"  The  following  chap- 
ter^ has  another  story  illustrating  the  humility  of  the  law- 
giver, whom  it  describes  as  "very  meek,  above  all  the 
men  that  were  on  the  face  of  the  earth. "^  In  this 
case  he  is  also  very  magnanimous,  for,  although  Miriam 
had  been  justly  pimished  for  attacking  him,  at  Aaron's 
request  he  interceded  for  her  and  procured  her  release 
from  the  malady  with  which  she  had  been  smitten. 

The  second  Ephraimite  has  his  own  version  of  the 
story  of  Samuel  and  his  relations  with  Saul.  Accord- 
ing to  him  Samuel  was  an  Ephraimite,  but,  being 
devoted  to  Yahweh,  he  was  reared  as  a  priest  at  Shiloh.^ 
While  he  was  yet  a  child  Yahweh  appeared  to  him  and 
revealed  to  him  the  impending  fall  of  the  house  of  EH.^ 
He  finally  became  a  great  prophet,  also  ruHng  Israel  as 
judge  for  many  years.^  When  he  became  old,  because 
his  sons  did  not  walk  in  his  steps,  the  people  asked  him 
to  give  them  a  king;  which,  after  a  serious  warning 
and  protest,  he  finally  consented  to  do.^  The  election 
took  place  at  Mizpah,  where  Samuel  gave  an  account 
of  his  stewardship  and  adjured  both  the  king  and  the 

■"Num.,  chap.  12.  » I  Sam.,  chap.  i.  s  I  Sam.  7:2  ff. 

»Vs.  3.  a  Sam.  3:1  ff.  «ISam.  8:iff. 


SECONDARY  ELEMENTS  IN  J  AND  E  155 

people  to  remain  faithful  to  Yahweh.'  Finally,  however, 
he  broke  with  Saul  and  recalled  his  approval  of  the 
election,  declaring  that  the  young  man  had  been  rejected 
by  Yahweh.^ 

This  story  can  hardly  be  regarded  as  historical, 
but  it  has  value  as  reflecting  the  ethical  ideas  of  the 
Hebrews  of  the  first  half  of  the  seventh  century  B.C. 
In  the  first  place  it  breathes  strong  condemnation  of  the 
vice  of  drunkenness:  witness  Eli's  sternness  with  Hannah 
while  he  thought  her  under  the  influence  of  wine,  and 
the  good  woman's  own  horror  at  the  idea  of  being  in 
such  a  condition.^ 

The  same  chapter  presents  an  interesting  and 
instructive  picture  of  the  domestic  Hfe  of  the  Hebrews, 
their  passion  for  children,  the  jealousy  and  consequent 
imhappiness  of  rival  wives,  and  the  sympathy  and  ten- 
derness of  which  the  Hebrew  husband  was  capable."* 

These  later  Ephraimite  additions  are  most  prolific 
on  the  subject  of  official  morality.  The  author  describes 
the  conduct  of  the  priests,  the  sons  of  Eli,  in  their 
office.  They  were  not  content,  he  says,  with  the 
definite  share  in  a  sacrifice  assigned  to  them,  but, 
when  the  flesh  was  being  cooked  for  the  sacrificial  meal, 
they  came  with  a  three-tined  fork  and  took  all  that  they 
could  lift  from  the  pot  and  carry  away  on  it.  Some- 
times, indeed,  before  the  flesh  had  been  placed  over  the 
fire,  or  the  fat  burned  to  Yahweh,  they  sent  a  demand 

^  I  Sam.,  chap.  12.  ^  I  Sam.  15:242. 

3 1  Sam.  i:ii£E.  In  2:22  the  sons  of  Eli  are  accused  of  illicit 
intercourse  with  the  women  who  served  in  the  sanctuary,  but  the 
latter  half  of  this  verse  is  an  interpolation  borrowed  from  Exod.  38 : 8. 

*  I  Sam.  I :  I  ff. 


156        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

for  raw  flesh,  and  took  it  by  force  if  anyone  objected.^ 
There  were  similar  abuses  in  the  administration  of 
justice.  Not,  however,  in  the  case  of  Samuel.  He  was 
so  faithful  that,  when,  toward  the  close  of  his  life,  the 
people  demanded  a  king,  he  could  safely  challenge  them 
to  find  a  blot  on  his  record.*  *'Here  I  am,"  he  says; 
"witness  against  me  before  Yahweh  and  before  his 
anointed:  whose  ox  have  I  taken?  or  whose  ass  have 
I  taken  ?  or  whom  have  I  defrauded  ?  whom  have  I 
oppressed?  or  from  whose  hand  have  I  taken  a  bribe, 
to  blind  therewith  my  eyes?  and  I  will  restore  it  to 
you";  and  they  were  obliged  to  confess  that  he  had  not 
been  guilty  of  any  of  these  wrongs.  His  sons,  however, 
like  those  of  Eli,  so  far  from  imitating  his  example, 
'turned  aside  after  lucre,  took  bribes,  and  perverted 
justice";^  and  this  is  given  as  the  reason  for  the  popular 
movement  in  favor  of  a  monarchy .^  At  this  point  is 
introduced  the  remarkable  sketch  of  the  future  king 
by  which  the  prophet  sought  to  turn  his  people  from 
their  purpose.  It  is  not  historical  in  the  sense  of  repro- 
ducing what  Samuel  said  on  a  given  occasion,  since  it 
clearly  presupposes  the  reign  of  Solomon,  but  it  is 
trustworthy  as  an  expression  of  the  sentiment  among 
the  prophets  of  the  end  of  the  eighth,  and  the  beginning 
of  the  seventh,  century  B.C.  concerning  the  monarchy. 
Hosea,  it  will  be  remembered,  regarded  its  establish- 
ment as  a  revolt  from  Yahweh  which  had  provoked  the 
divine  wrath  and  brought  nothing  but  calamities.^ 
The  author  of  the  description  cited  is  of  the  same 
opinion.    These  are  the  words  he  puts  into  the  mouth 

'I  Sam.  2:12  ff.  3 1  Sam.  8:3.  sRos.  10:9;  i3:iof. 

»ISam.  12:3  f.  ^ISam.  8:5. 


SECONDARY  ELEMENTS  IN  J  AND  E  157 

of  Yahweh:  "Hearken  to  the  voice  of  the  people  in  all 
that  they  say  to  thee;  for  they  have  not  rejected  thee, 
but  they  have  rejected  me,  that  I  should  not  be  king 
over  them."  Then  comes  the  picture,  suggested,  as 
has  been  observed,  by  reminiscences  of  Solomon,  but 
realized  to  a  greater  or  less  extent  in  the  best  of  his 
successors  in  both  kingdoms.  For,  it  should  be  noted, 
the  king  here  described  is  not  a  tyrant  in  the  abnormal 
sense  of  the  word,  but  simply  an  autocrat,  and  the  evils 
are  those  that  naturally,  and,  to  the  author's  mind, 
inevitably,  accompany  the  exercise  of  irresponsible 
power.  If  the  author  had  been  writing  from  the  stand- 
point of  his  own  time,  instead  of  that  of  the  heroic  age, 
he  might  have  cited,  not  only  Solomon,  but  David  and 
Ahab  and  their  capricious  violations  of  recognized  rights. 

There  is  one  more  passage  that  should  be  cited  in 
this  connection,  because  it  illustrates  another  phase  of 
the  tendency  that  showed  itself  in  I  Sam.  I3:7b-i5. 
There  the  author  sought  to  justify  the  rejection  of 
Saul,  and  thus  by  implication  relieve  David  of  any 
suspicion  of  usurpation.  The  passage  in  question, 
II  Sam.  7:1-12  and  14-29,  marks  a  further  step  in  the 
same  direction;  for,  although  its  author  does  not,  like 
the  Chronicler,'  give  David  the  credit  of  having  "pre- 
pared abundantly"  for  the  temple  built  by  his  son,  he 
pictures  the  old  king  as  a  pattern  of  piety  who  would 
himself  have  built  a  house  for  Yahweh,  had  he  not,  on 
expressing  such  an  intention,  received  through  Nathan 
divine  instructions  to  the  contrary.  It  is  this  ideaHzed 
David  who  became  the  type  of  the  king  of  the  Hebrews' 
golden  future. 

^I  Chron.  22:2  s. 


158        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

When  the  Judean  and  Ephraimite  narratives  were 
united,  the  compiler  made  some  additions  by  way  of 
adjustment  or  amplification,  and  there  were  doubtless 
later  accretions  of  a  similar  character.  Some  of  these 
passages  have  no  ethical  significance,  but  there  are 
others  that  should  here  receive  attention.  In  the  first 
place,  there  are  several  in  which  the  blessings  promised 
to  the  fathers  are  brought  to  prominent  notice.  The 
first  is  Gen.  13:14-17,  where  Yahweh  says  to  Abraham, 
among  other  things,  "I  will  make  thy  seed  as  the  dust 
of  the  earth;  so  that,  if  a  man  can  number  the  dust  of 
the  earth,  then  shall  thy  seed  be  numbered. '^  See 
also  Gen.  22:14-18,  where  a  similar  comparison  is 
made  with  "the  stars  of  heaven"  and  "the  sand  that 
is  on  the  seashore";  and  finally  the  renewal  of  this 
promise  to  Isaac'  and  Jacob  .^  The  bearing  of  these 
passages  on  the  subject  in  hand  is  found  in  the  fact 
that  the  promise  therein  contained,  or  its  equivalent, 
is  elsewhere  cited  in  cases  in  which  ethical  considera- 
tions are  involved.  Thus,  in  Exod.  32:7-14,  where 
Yahweh,  in  his  indignation  because  his  people  have 
broken  their  covenant  with  him,  exclaims,  "Let  me 
alone,  that  my  wrath  may  wax  hot  against  them,  and  I 
may  consume  them,"  Moses  finally  overcomes  the  divine 
resentment  by  pleading  this  promise.  "Remember," 
he  says  (vs.  13),  "Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Israel,  thy 
servants,  to  whom  thou  swarest  by  thine  own  self, 
saying,  I  will  multiply  your  seed  as  the  stars  of  heaven, 
and  all  this  land  that  I  have  spoken  of  will  I  give  to 
your  seed,  and  they  shall  inherit  it  for  ever."  The 
story  concludes  with    the  statement    that  "Yahweh 

«  Gen.  26:3b-s.  "  Gen.  32:9-12. 


SECONDARY  ELEMENTS  IN  J  AND  E  159 

repented  of  the  evil  that  he  said  he  would  do  to  his 
people."  It  will  be  observed  that  there  is  here  no 
reference  to  repentance  or  amendment  on  the  part  of 
the  people  as  a  ground  for  the  desired  change  in  the 
attitude  of  Yahweh  toward  them;  so  that  what  Moses 
really  asks  Yahweh  to  do  is  to  fulfil  his  part  in  a  cove- 
nant that  his  people  show  no  disposition  to  observe,  in 
other  words,  to  make  them  the  objects  of  the  arbitrary 
and  unconditional  grace  of  33:18  f.  It  amounts  to  the 
same  thing  when,  in  Num.  14:11-16,  Yahweh  having 
threatened  to  smite  the  Israelites  "with  the  pestilence 
and  disinherit  them,"  because  they  refused  to  invade 
Canaan  from  Kadesh,  Moses  enters  the  subtle  plea, 
''If  thou  shalt  kill  this  people  as  one  man,  then  the 
nations  that  have  heard  report  of  thee  will  speak, 
saying.  Because  Yahweh  was  not  able  to  bring  his 
people  to  the  land  that  he  swore  to  them,  therefore 
hath  he  slain  them  in  the  desert."^  Mention  should 
also  be  made  of  Exod.  32 :  30-34.  Here,  however,  Moses 
succeeds  in  persuading  Yahweh  only  to  postpone  the 
punishment  he  was  on  the  point  of  inflicting. 

In  the  passages  thus  far  cited  there  is  evidence  of  the 
disturbance  of  the  ethical  development  of  the  Hebrews 
by  theological  influences.  In  Judges  and  Samuel  the 
editorial  additions,  Uke  those  from  the  second  Judean 
and  Ephraimite  writers,  are  of  an  apologetic  character. 
Thus,  Judg.  II :  12-28  is  an  elaborate  attempt  to  estabhsh 
the  claim  of  the  Hebrews  to  the  country  between  the 
Arnon  and  the  Jabbok,  and  justify  the  war  in  which 
Jephthah  won  it  from  the  invading  Ammonites.  In 
Samuel  the  object  of  the  author  of  them  seems  to  have 

'  Exod.  32:12. 


i6o        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

been  to  protect  David  from  a  charge  of  having  betrayed 
Saul  or  deprived  his  son  of  the  succession.  Thus,  to 
cite  the  last  first,  II  Sam.  21 :  2b  dwells  upon  the  breach 
of  faith  of  which  Saul  was  guilty  in  his  treatment  of  the 
Gibeonites.  In  I  Sam.  28:i7f.  Samuel  is  represented 
as  reminding  the  unfortunate  king  of  his  failure  to 
execute  the  ''fierce  wrath"  of  Yahweh  upon  the  Amalek- 
ites,  and  the  decree  by  which  at  that  time  Yahweh 
"rent  the  kingdom"  from  him  and  gave  it  to  David. 
Moreover,  both  Saul  and  Jonathan  are  made  to  renounce 
any  claim  to  the  throne  in  favor  of  the  son  of  Jesse. 
This  is  the  declaration  that  is  put  into  the  mouth  of 
Saul  at  En-gedi,  "I  know  that  thou  shalt  surely  be 
king,  and  that  the  kingdom  of  Israel  shall  be  estabHshed 
in  thy  hand."  All  he  asks  is  that  David  will  not  rob 
him  of  a  posterity,  and  this  request  the  young  man, 
although  the  ethics  of  the  time  hardly  required  him  to 
cherish  possible  rivals,  he  readily  took  an  oath  to  fulfil. 
According  to  I  Sam.  20:4-17  and  40-42,  Jonathan  had 
some  time  before  this  foreseen  the  fall  of  his  own  house, 
and  acquiesced  in  the  will  of  Yahweh,  only  pledging  his 
friend  not  to  neglect  to  be  kind  to  the  survivors,  when 
Yahweh  had  "cut  off  the  enemies  of  David  every  one 
from  the  face  of  the  earth,"  that  is,  when  David  had 
come  to  undisputed  possession  of  the  royal  authority. 


CHAPTER  XIII 

THE  DEUTERONOMIC  ETHICS 

I.      THE  BOOK  OF  DEUTERONOMY 

The  Book  of  Deuteronomy  in  its  present  form,  it  is 
generally  admitted,  is  a  composite  production.  In  the 
first  place,  there  are  portions  of  it  that  have  evidently 
been  added  or  edited  to  adapt  them  to  the  place  they 
now  occupy  at  the  end  of  the  Pentateuch.  But,  when 
these  are  removed,  there  still  remains  evidence  pointing 
to  two  or  more  authors.  The  most  striking  proof  of 
its  composite  authorship  is  the  alternation  of  the  plural 
with  the  singular  of  the  second  person  in  the  parts  in 
which  Moses  is  represented  as  addressing  his  people. 
Thus,  in  chap.  12,  vss.  i,  5,  7,  9,  and  16  have  both 
forms,  the  rest  of  vss.  1-12  only  the  plural,  and  vss. 
13-15  and  17-31  only  the  singular.  Moreover,  it  will 
be  found  that  vss.  2-12  duplicate  vss.  13-15  and  17-31, 
but  that,  while  the  latter  passage  gives  prominence  to 
the  centralization  of  worship,  the  former  emphasizes  the 
destruction  of  the  native  cults  of  Canaan.  The  simplest 
of  the  theories  based  on  these  and  related  facts  is  to  the 
effect  that  Deuteronomy  originally  had  a  briefer  form 
in  which  the  pronoun  used  by  Moses  in  his  addresses 
was  always  singular,  and  that  this  book  was  later  revised 
and  enlarged  by  a  second  writer  who  sometimes  imitated 
the  style  of  the  original,  but  naturally,  and  therefore 
generally,  employed  the  plural.  The  dates  at  which 
these  two  authors  wrote  must  lie  between  72£and_62i^ 
B.C.,  since  it  is  clear  that  there  would  harc^Tiave  Been' 

161 


i62        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

an  attempt  to  maintain  that  the  law  of  Moses  required 
all  Israel  to  worship  at  one  sanctuary  until  after  the 
Northern  Kingdom  had  been  overthrown;  and  it  is 
more  than  probable,  from  the  description  of  Josiah's 
reforms,  that  the  book  on  which  those  reforms  were 
based  was  Deuteronomy  in  a  revised  and  expanded 
form.  On  the  whole  it  may  safely  be  concluded  that 
the  original  work  was  compiled  early  in  the  reign  of 
Manasseh  (686-639  B.C.),  and  that  the  second  edition 
was  prepared  toward  the  end  of  the  same  reign.^  It 
must,  however,  be  observed,  that  the  original  of  Deu- 
teronomy was  itself  a  compilation,  and  that,  as  will 
appear  when  it  is  studied  more  in  detail,  the  parts  of 
it  that  are  ethically  most  productive  are  largely  based 
on  the  Ephraimite  code  of  Exod.,  chaps.  21-23.  The 
method  of  treating  it  must  therefore  be  that  of  compari- 
son, first  of  the  *older  parts  with  their  Ephraimite  or 
other  original,  and  then  of  the  differing  strata  in  it  with 
one  another. 

The  Deuteronomic  Code  is  emphatic  with  reference 
to  impurity.  Sodomy  and  prostitution  are  expressly 
forbidden  in  Israel,  and,  lest  these  forms  of  vice  should 
be  permitted  in  the  Hebrew  temple,  as  they  were  at  the 
Canaanite  sanctuaries,  for  the  sake  of  the  revenue 
derived  from  them,  the  people  are  prohibited  from 
bringing  to  the  house  of  Yahweh  *'the  hire  of  a  harlot 
or  the  wages  of  a  dog,"  the  latter  being  another  name 

^  Steuemagel,  in  his  commentary  on  Deuteronomy  and  Joshua 
(vi  f.),  supposes  that  there  were  originally  two  independent  works,  in 
one  of  which,  compiled  about  690  B.C.,  the  singular  was  used,  and  in 
the  other,  twenty  years  younger,  the  plural,  and  that  they  were  united 
by  an  editor  about  650  B.C. 


THE  DEUTERONOMIC  ETHICS  163 

for  the  male  hierodule/  This  is  an  addition  to  the 
Ephraimite  Code,  but  more  significant  is  the  specifica- 
tion of  two  forms  of  indecency,  immodest  seizure  of  a 
man  by  a  woman,  punished  by  the  loss  of  the  offending 
hand,^  and  the  interchange  of  garments  between  the 
sexes,^  which  was  a  feature  of  Canaanite  worship  and 
in  itself  morally  objectionable. 

The  new  law  does  not  radically  change  domestic 
custom  and  usage,  but  it  introduces  some  just  and 
humane  safeguards.  Thus,  polygamy  is  retained,  but 
it  is  ordained  that,  if  a  man  have  two  wives,  both  of 
whom  have  borne  him  children,  the  eldest  son  shall 
have  the  rights  and  the  portion  of  the  first-born,  even 
if  he  is  the  child  of  the  less  favored  wife."* 

The  law  concerning  divorce  makes  provision  only 
for  cases  in  which  the  wife  is  at  fault,  stipulating  that, 
if  a  woman  who  has  been  dismissed  by  her  husband 
marries  again,  she  cannot,  if  freed  by  death  or  divorce 
from  her  second  husband,  return  to  the  first.^  Compare 
the  Code  of  Hammurabi,^  according  to  which  a  woman 
unjustly  disHked  by  her  husband  could  leave  him  and 
take  her  marriage  portion  with  her. 

The  most  radical  law  on  the  subject  of  marriage 
is  that  abolishing  the  custom  according  to  which  a  son 
inherited  his  father's  wife  or  wives.^  The  child  of  such 
a  union,  or  any  other  incestuous  relation,  was  forbidden 
admission  to  the  assembly. 

*  Deut.  23 : 1 7  f .  s  Deut.  24 : 1-4. 

^Deut.  25:11  f.  ^  §  142. 

3Deut.  22:5.  7Deut.  22:30. 
4  Deut.  21:15-17. 


i64        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

The  subject  of  adultery  is  dealt  with  in  detail. 
The  man  who  falsely  accuses  his  wife  of  not  having 
been  a  virgin  when  he  married  her  must  pay  a  fine  of 
a  hundred  shekels  and  "may  not  put  her  away  all 
his  days."  If,  however,  the  charge  proves  true,  she 
is  to  be  stoned.'  Both  parties  in  a  case  of  illicit  inter- 
course are  to  be  put  to  death  if  the  woman  is  married;^ 
also  when  she  is  only  betrothed,  unless  she  is  a  victim 
of  violence.^  In  the  latter  case  only  the  man  has  to 
suffer.4  These  paragraphs  on  adultery  are  new,  but 
the  one  on  seduction^  is  a  variation  on  that  of  Exod. 
22:16  f.,  the  Ephraimite  Code  prescribing  that  the  se- 
ducer shall  purchase  the  girl  if  her  father  will  give  her 
to  him  in  marriage,  or  pay  a  fine  "according  to  the  dowry 
of  virgins,"  while  this  one  requires  that  he  shall  marry 
her,  paying  her  father  fifty  shekels,  without  the  right 
to  divorce  her  as  he  might  another  woman.  The  size 
of  the  bride-price  is  noticeable,  as  evidently  calculated 
to  discourage  this  species  of  lawlessness.  The  same 
effect  would  naturally  be  produced  by  the  exclusion  of 
bastards  from  the  assembly.^ 

The  Ephraimite  Code  directed  that  a  son  who 
smote  his  father  or  his  mother  should  be  put  to  death  ;7 
this  one^  prescribes  the  same  penalty  for  obstinate 
disobedience,  making  the  execution  a  solemn  ceremony 
so  that  "all  Israel  may  hear  and  fear." 

Besides  the  children  belonging  to  his  proper  family 
a  Hebrew  might  have  a  son  reckoned  as  the  offspring 
of  a  deceased  brother,  in  accordance  with  the  so-called 

*  Deut.  22:13-21.  4  Deut.  22:25-27.  ^  Exod.  21:15. 

*Deut.  22:22.  s  Deut.  22:28  f.  *Deut.  21:18-21. 

3Deut.  22:23  f.  ^  Deut.  23:2. 


THE  DEUTERONOMIC  ETHICS  165 

levirate  law.  This  law  was  in  force  among  the  Hebrews 
from  the  earliest  times.*  The  object  of  it  is  evident, 
namely,  to  prevent  the  extinction  of  the  families  of  those 
whom  death  might  overtake  before  they  had  sons  to 
represent  them.  In  Deuteronomy^  this  law  is  modified 
and  restricted,  that  it  may  not  work  the  hardship  which 
must  sometimes  have  followed  the  original  custom.  In 
the  first  place,  the  operation  of  it  is  confined  to  cases  in 
which  two  brothers  ** dwell  together,"  either  on  the  same 
estate  or  in  the  same  neighborhood.  Secondly,  it  is 
here  only  the  first-born  of  such  a  marriage  who  is  to  be 
reckoned  to  the  deceased  husband.  Finally,  a  way  is 
left  by  which  the  surviving  brother  may  escape  the 
obligation  imposed  upon  him,  if  he  is  willing  to  bear 
the  reproach  of  refusing  to  perform  a  generally  recognized 
duty.  This  seems  a  rather  severe  alternative,  but  it  is 
probable  that  in  process  of  time,  as  one  after  another 
from  necessity  adopted  it,  the  ceremony  prescribed 
ceased  to  be  a  serious  matter.^ 

The  new  code  is  more  generous  toward  slaves  than 
the  old  one.  In  the  first  place,  the  master  is  exhorted, 
when,  at  the  end  of  six  years,  he  releases  a  Hebrew 
servant,  not  to  let  him  go  "empty,"  but  to  "furnish 
him  Hberally"  from  the  stores  with  which  Yahweh  has 
blessed  him.'*  Moreover,  the  female  slave,  as  well  as 
the  male,  is  to  be  treated  in  this  Hberal  fashion.  This  is 
a  noteworthy  modification  of  Exod.  21:7-11,  where  it 
is  expressly  ordained  that  a  Hebrew  maid-servant 
"shall  not  go  out  as  the  men-servants  do."  The  change 
seems  to  have  grown  out  of  the  fact  that,  whereas,  in 

»  Gen.,  chap.  38.  J  Cf .  Ruth  4:12. 

»  Deut.  25 :  s-io.  *  Deut.  15:1 2-14. 


1 66        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

earlier  days  among  the  Hebrews  concubines  were  com- 
monly slaves  of  their  own  race,  as  time  passed  foreign 
women  took  their  places.  This  view  is  favored  by  the 
circumstance  that  in  Deut.  21 :  10-14  there  is  introduced 
a  law  relative  to  female  captives  according  to  which,  if 
a  master,  having  made,..one  his  concubine,  finds  ^'no 
delight  in  her,"  he-Hlust  set  her  free,  just  as,  according 
to  Exod.  21:11,  the  Hebrew  concubine  became  entitled 
to  her  freedom  if  her  master  and  husband  neglected  his 
marital  duties/ 

The  condition  of  slaves  among  the  Hebrews,  as  has 
already  been  observed,  seems  generally  to  have  been 
very  tolerable.  Yet,  there  were  doubtless  exceptions, 
else  the  laws  in  Exodus,^  prescribing  penalties  for  killing 
or  injuring  them,  would  not  have  been  adopted.  The 
Deuteronomic  Code  undertakes  entirely  to  prevent  such 
abuses.  To  this  end  it  requires  the  admission  of  slaves 
to  the  most  sacred  privilege  of  the  family,  namely,  par- 
ticipation in  the  annual  feasts  at  the  central  sanctuary. 
It  is  taken  for  granted  that  such  treatment  will  make 
those  whose  lot  is  service  content  and  faithful.  At  any 
rate,  it  is  the  only  means  prescribed,  for  this  code 
omits  any  reference  to  damages  for  injuries  received 
and  substitutes  for  them  a  single  article  forbidding  the 
return  by  a  third  party  of  a  bondman  who  has  fled  from 
his  master,^  the  idea  evidently  being  that  the  slave  would 

*  Note  the  way  in  which  the  law  respecting  Hebrew  slaves  is  adapted 
to  the  general  requirement  of  the  centralization  of  worship.  In  Exodus 
the  slave  who  elected  to  remain  with  his  master  was  taken  to  the  nearest 
sanctuary  to  have  his  ear  pierced.  It  would  have  been  too  much  to 
require  that  this  ceremony  be  transferred  to  the  temple  at  Jerusalem; 
hence  permission  is  given  for  its  performance  at  the  door  of  the  master's 
house  (Deut.  15:17). 

'  Exod.  21:20  f.,  26  f.  'Deut.  23:15. 


THE  DEUTERONOMIC  ETHICS  167 

not  have  run  away  if  he  had  been  properly  treated,  and 
that  the  master  deserves  the  loss  he  has  sustained  for 
his  inhumanity. 

The  social  ethics  of  the  Deuteronomic  Code,  also, 
manifests  a  fervent  good-will,  especially  toward  the 
unfortunate. 

The  brief  law  in  Exod.  21:12-14  with  reference  to 
homicide  is  here  greatly  expanded,  to  the  end  that  the 
innocent  manslayer  may  be  protected  from  the  thought- 
less resentment  of  the  relatives  of  his  victim,  but  the 
wilful  murderer  publicly  condemned  and  executed. 
First,  it  was  necessary,  on  account  of  the  abohtion  of 
the  local  sanctuaries,  where  manslayers  had  previously 
found  refuge,'  and  the  injustice  of  substituting  for  them 
a  single  central  asylum,  to  set  apart  a  number  of  cities 
conveniently  located  for  this  purpose.  The  number  first 
given  is  three,^  but,  in  harmony  with  the  fiction  that 
the  law  originated  with  Moses,  he  is  represented  as 
making  provision  for  the  appointment  of  three  more, 
"that  innocent  blood  be  not  shed,"  when  the  whole  of 
the  Promised  Land  shall  have  been  conquered.^  The 
second  important  development  in  this  law  provides  that 
the  judges  in  a  given  case  shall  be  the  elders  of  the  city 
to  which  the  accused  belongs.  It  is  interesting,  also, 
to  note  the  pains  taken  to  illustrate  the  possibihty  of 
accidents  and  stimulate  sympathy  for  the  innocent 
instrument  of  such  a  misfortune. 

An  increased  respect  for  human  life  is  shown,  espe- 
cially in  the  law  respecting  murder  by  an  unknown 
hand.'*    In  such  a  case  the  elders  of  the  city  nearest 

^  Exod.  21 :  14.  3  Deut.  19 : 8  f . 

»  Deut.  19 : 2.  4  Deut.  21 : 1-3,  5-9. 


i68        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

the  scene  of  the  crime  are  required  to  disavow  it,  and 
perform  a  ceremony  setting  forth  the  innocence  of  the 
community.^  So,  also,  in  that  which  requires  the  owner 
of  a  house  to  provide  the  flat  roof  with  a  battlement, 
lest  anyone  fall  from  it  and  thus  bring  blood  upon  the 
house.^ 

In  this  connection  mention  should  be  made  of  two 
or  three  other  laws  affecting  the  person.  The  first  is 
of  great  importance,  since  it  abolishes  the  ancient  rule 
that  the  family  or  community  must  suffer  with  the 
guilty  individual,  and  clearly  ordains  that  ''fathers 
shall  not  be  put  to  death  for  children,  neither  shall 
children  be  put  to  death  for  fathers;  every  man  shall 
be  put  to  death  for  his  own  sin";^  a  law  to  which 
Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel  give  the  express  sanction  of  their 
great  authority.  The  second  of  these  laws  forbids 
cruelty  even  toward  criminals.  The  limit  of  corporal 
punishment  is  fixed  at  ''forty  stripes,"  the  reason — 
and  one  worthy  of  the  most  humane  and  enlightened 
of  modern  penologists — being,  "lest,  if  he  (the  judge) 
should  punish  him  with  many  more  stripes  than  these, 
thy  brother  be  degraded  in  thine  eyes."^  The  same 
reason  might  have  been  given  for  the  law  of  Deut. 
2i:22f.  At  any  rate,  when  one  recalls  the  practice  of 
exposing  malefactors  after  death  on  the  gibbet,  as  illus- 
trated in  the  horrible  story  of  Rizpah  and  her  sons,^  one 

^  The  Code  of  Hammurabi  (§  23)  ordains  that,  when  a  robbery 
has  been  committed  by  an  unknown  person,  "the  man  who  has  been 
despoiled  shall  recount  before  God  what  he  has  lost,  and  the  city  and 
governor  in  whose  land  and  district  the  robbery  took  place  shall  render 
back  to  him  whatever  of  his  was  lost." 

» Deut.  22:8.  -♦  Deut.  25:3. 

3  Deut.  24: 16.  5 II  Sam.  21 : 8  ff. 


THE  DEUTERONOMIC  ETHICS  169 

appreciates  the  ethical  significance  of  the  command,  "If 
a  man  have  committed  a  sin  worthy  of  death,  and  he 
be  put  to  death,  and  thou  hang  him  on  a  tree,  his  body 
shall  not  remain  all  night  on  the  tree,  but  thou  shalt 
surely  bury  him  the  same  day."  Finally  it  is  forbidden^ 
to  kidnap  an  Israelite  and  hold  or  sell  him  as  a  slave. 
This  seems  a  narrower  form  of  Exod.  21:16;  but  it  is 
probable  that  in  this  passage  "a  man"  means  an  Israelite 
— ^which  is  actually  the  reading  of  the  Greek  Version — 
and  that  therefore  the  later  is  merely  a  repetition  of  the 
earlier  statute. 

The  Deuteronomic  Code  lays  proper  stress  on  the 
requirements  of  common  honesty.  Thus,  when  a  man 
has  made  a  vow,  it  insists  that  he  shall  pay  it,  lest  he  be 
found  lying  to  Yahweh.*  The  tricks  in  business  still 
prevalent  in  the  Orient,  such  as  false  weights  and 
measures,  are  prohibited  under  penalty  of  divine 
retribution.3  Finally,  it  demands  that  the  ancient 
landmarks  fixing  the  limits  of  adjoining  estates  be 
held  sacred  and  inviolate.^ 

In  Exod.  18:135.  the  Ephraimite  narrator  reports 
that  Moses,  at  the  suggestion  of  his  father-in-law, 
appointed  a  corps  of  judges  to  hear  causes  of  ordinary 
occurrence,  reserving  to  himself  the  decision  in  those  of 
greater  importance.  At  the  end  of  his  code  he  takes 
occasion  to  warn  those  whom  it  concerns  not  to  use 
the  forms  of  law  to  defeat  the  ends  of  justice.^  The 
new  code,  ignoring  the  previous  provision,  directs  the 
appointment  of  judges  for  the  various  places  through 
the  tribes,^  and  gives  instruction  concerning  the  adminis- 

'  Deut.  24: 7.       3  Deut.  25 :  13-16.    s  Exod.  21 : 1-3,  6-9. 
»  Deut.  23 :  21-23.    *  Deut.  19 :  14.      ^  Deut.  16 ;  i3. 


I70        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

tration  of  justice.  There  must  be  at  least  two  witnesses 
against  the  accused  to  justify  conviction.^  A  false 
witness  is  to  be  punished  as  the  accused  would  have  been, 
had  the  charge  proved  true.=*  Those  cases  that  are 
beyond  the  local  authorities  are  to  be  carried  to  the 
priests  at  the  central  sanctuary  or  the  ruling  judge, 
whose  decision  shall  be  final.^  The  judges  are  exhorted 
not  to  wrest  justice  by  favoring  any  person  or  class  of 
persons,  or  by  selHng  their  decisions  for  money,^  and 
to  be  especially  careful  not  to  discriminate  against  the 
sojourner,  the  orphan,  or  the  widow.^ 

The  Deuteronomic  far  surpasses  the  Ephraimite 
Code  in  its  attention  to  the  •  dependent  classes.  A 
notable  illustration  of  this  statement  is  found  in  the 
section  concerning  laborers,**  where  the  employer  is  not 
only  forbidden  to  oppress  a  hired  servant,  whether  native 
or  foreign,  but  required  to  pay  him  every  night  for  the 
work  of  the  preceding  day,  because  he  is  poor  and 
dependent  on  his  wages. 

The  regulations  concerning  loans  testify  to  the 
deepest  sympathy  with  the  debtor.  The  Hebrews  did 
not  then  borrow  from  one  another  for  purposes  of  trade, 
but  to  meet  pressing  necessities.  A  loan  therefore  was 
a  charitable,  and  not  a  commercial,  transaction.  This 
is  the  reason  why,  in  Exod.  22:25,  it  was  forbidden  to 
the  Hebrew  to  act  the  usurer  with  his  neighbor.     The 

'Deut.  17:6;  19:15. 

"  Deut.  19:15-21.  In  vs.  17  of  this  passage  the  words  "before 
Yahweh,  before  the  priests,  and"  are  an  interpolation.  Note  also  that 
the  Code  of  Hammurabi  (§§  1-4)  prescribes  the  same  penalty  for  giving 
false  testimony. 

3  Deut.  17:8-13.  sDeut.  24:17. 

4  Deut.  16: 19.  ^  Deut.  24: 14  f. 


THE  DEUTERONOMIC  ETHICS  171 

prohibition  is  repeated  in  Deut.  23:19,  and  extended 
to  victuals,  or  anything  else  on  which  others  took 
discount.  Moreover,  the  Hebrews  were  not  allowed 
to  embarrass  one  another  in  the  matter  of  security. 
The  lender  might  not  enter  the  borrower's  house  to 
obtain  a  pledge,'  or  keep  the  poor  man's  garment  from 
him  over  night  ;^  or  take  a  mill,  or  any  part  of  it,^  or  a 
widow's  garment,''  in  pawn.  Finally,  Deuteronomy 
applies  the  principle  of  release  to  debts  as  well  as  slaves, 
and  provides^  that  every  seven  years  "every  creditor 
shall  release  that  which  he  hath  lent  to  his  neighbor; 
he  shall  not  exact  it  of  his  neighbor  and  his  brother." 
At  the  same  time  he  appeals  to  those  who  have  means 
not  to  be  moved  by  the  prospect  of  losing  their  money, 
as  the  year  of  release  draws  near,  to  refuse  help  to  those 
who  are  destitute.  "Thou  shalt  not,"  he  pleads, 
"harden  thy  heart,  or  shut  thy  hand  from  thy  poor 
brother,  but  thou  shalt  surely  open  thy  hand  to  him, 
and  shalt  surely  lend  to  him  enough  for  his  need." 

The  lot  of  the  poor  is  further  ameliorated  by  a 
nimiber  of  purely  charitable  provisions.  One  of  these 
is  that  which  permits  the  wayfarer  in  passing  to  pluck 
grain  or  grapes  from  a  field  or  vineyard  to  satisfy  his 
hunger.^  A  second  requires  that  a  sheaf  left  in  the 
field,  and  the  gleanings  of  the  orchard  and  the  vine- 
yard, be  given  to  "the  sojourner,  the  orphan,  and  the 
widow.  "7  Finally,  the  same  classes,  with  the  Levites, 
may  share  in  the  sacrificial  feasts  at  the  sanctuary,* 
and  the  tithe  of  the  third  year  must  be  laid  up  in 

*  Deut.  24:10  f.  4  Deut.  24:17.  7  Deut.  24:19-22. 

»  Deut.  24:12  £.  sDeut.  i5:if.  *  Deut.  16:11,  14. 

3  Deut.  24:6.  <*  Deut.  23:24. 


172        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

convenient  places  and  distributed  to  them,  that  they 
may  ''eat  and  be  satisfied."' 

This  abundant  good-will  does  not  exhaust  itself  upon 
the  poor  and  destitute.  It  seeks  out  the  young  husband 
and  bids  him  remain  at  home  for  a  year  after  marriage 
to  "cheer  his  wife  whom  he  hath  taken."^  It  concerns 
itself  with  cattle  that  have  gone  astray  or  fallen  in 
the  way,  and  anything  else  with  the  loss  of  which  a 
neighbor  is  threatened,^  even  with  the  ox  toihng  on 
the  threshing-floor'*  and  the  bird  brooding  over  its 
youngjS  asking  no  reward  but  the  pleasure  of  being 
kind  and  helpful. 

The  foreigner  seems  not  to  have  been  treated  as 
generously  by  the  Deuteronomist  as  might  have  been 
expected.  In  the  first  place,  it  must  be  observed  that 
this  writer  makes  a  distinction  between  persons,  whether 
Hebrews  from  other  tribes  or  members  of  other  races, 
who  live  in  a  given  Hebrew  community,  and  utter 
strangers  to  his  race  and  that  community.  The  former 
are  called  sojourners,  and,  as  has  been  noted,  although 
they  are  hardly  recognized  as  the  equals  of  native 
Hebrews,  are  treated  with  the  utmost  consideration. 
The  latter  are  called  "foreigners,"  and  are  expressly 
denied  certain  rights  granted  to  Hebrews.  Thus,  the 
foreigner  cannot  claim  relief  from  discount  on  anything 
borrowed,^  or  take  advantage  of  the  year  of  release  to 
rid  himself  of  burdensome  debts,^  or  aspire  to  rule  over 
the  Chosen  People.* 

^Deut.  14:28  f.;  26:i2f.                 sDeut.  22:6f. 

«  Deut.  24 : 5.  ^  Deut.  23 :  20. 

3 Deut.  22:1-4.  'Deut.  15:3. 

-•Deut.  25:4.  "Deut.  17:15. 


THE  DEUTERONOMIC  ETHICS  173 

Thus  far  the  foreigner  has  been  an  individual  alien 
temporarily  resident  in  a  Hebrew  community,  and  the 
statutes  cited  have  indicated  no  positive  hostihty  to 
such  persons.  There  is  little  in  the  code  proper,  in 
its  original  form,  of  a  different  character.  The  most 
important  passage  is  20:10-14,  where  it  is  ordained  j 
that,  when  the  jfebrews  are  about  to  attack  a  city,  they 
shall  "proclaim  peace,"  that  is,  offer  to  spare  the  inhabi- 
tants if  they  will  submit  to  "become  tributary";  and 
that,  even  if  the  offer  is  rejected,  when  the  city  is  finally 
taken  the  women  and  the  children  shall  be  preserved 
aHve.  This  law  is  now  followed  by  a  supplementary 
paragraph  explaining  that  it  applies  only  to  cities 
outside  Canaan,  but  it  is  doubtful  if  such  was  its  original 
intent.  Still,  in  19:1  Moses  alludes  to  the  time  when 
Yahweh  will  have  "cut  off  the  nations"  in  whose  land 
and  in  whose  cities  he  purposed  that  Israel  should  dwell, 
and,  in  7 : 2  f .,  which  seems  to  have  come  from  the  same 
hand,  they  are  commanded,  not  only  not  to  make 
treaties  or  marriages  with  the  Canaanites,  but  to 
destroy  them  thoroughly  and  without  mercy.' 

The  law  excluding  Ammonites  and  Moabites  from 
the  assembly^*  cannot  be  cited  as  an  indication  of  hostility 
to  foreigners  as  such,  for,  as  appears  from  the  context, 
the  reason  for  their  exclusion  is  not  because  they  are 
of  foreign  extraction,  but  because,  according  to  Gen. 
19:30  ff.,  they  were  the  offspring  of  incest.  See  23:2, 
where  "bastard"  means  such  a  child.  The  admission 
of  Edomites  and  Egyptians  to  the  assembly  in  the  third 
generation  points  in  the  other  direction. 

^  See  also  Deut.  7:16,  24;  9:4a. 
'  Deut.  23:3. 


174        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

The  attitude  of  the  Deuteronomist  toward  foreigners 
is,  at  first  sight,  disappointing,  but  it  is  perfectly  expli- 
cable. When  he  wrote  Judah  had  long  been  subject  to 
Assyria,  and  Manasseh  had  made  it  his  policy  to  patron- 
ize foreign  cults.  He  had  even  ''built  altars  for  all  the 
host  of  heaven  in  the  two  courts  of  the  house  of  Yah- 
weh.'^'  Thus,  the  religion  of  Yahweh  was  threatened 
with  extinction,  and  the  author  of  this  book  could  see 
no  salvation  for  it  and  his  people  except  in  the  total 
suppression  of  alien  power  and  influence." 

2.      THE   THIRD  DECALOGUE 

Thus  far  there  have  been  only  passing  references  to  the 
decalogue  found  in  Exod.,  chap.  20,  and  in  a  somewhat 
different  version  in  the  fifth  chapter  of  Deuteronomy. 
It  is,  of  course,  impossible  to  regard  these  ten  command- 
ments as,  in  any  strict  sense  of  the  term.  Mosaic.  It 
has  been  shown  that  each  of  the  two  oldest  documents 
underlying  the  Pentateuch,  designated  as  the  Judean, 
or  Yahwistic,  and  the  Ephraimite,  or  Elohistic,  had  a 
decalogue.  If,  therefore,  there  is  a  Mosaic  decalogue, 
it  cannot  be  the  one  heretofore  so  distinguished,  but 
that  of  Exod.,  chap.  34  (J),  of  which  the  Ephraimite, 
now  incorporated  in  the  so-called  Book  of  the  Covenant, 
was  a  later  modification. 

The  actual  age  and  authorship  of  the  decalogue  of 
Exod.,  chap.  20,  and  Deut.,  chap.  5,  is  a  question  on 
which  there  is  difference  of  opinion,  some  attributing 
it  to  a  late  writer  of  the  Ephraimite  school,  and  others 
to  a  Deuteronomic  author.  The  former  of  these  views 
seems   the  more  defensible.     In  the  first  place,   this 

^n  Kings  21:5.  n  Kings  17:2  ff. 


THE  DEUTERONOMIC  ETHICS  175 

decalogue  cannot  have  belonged  to  the  original  of  the 
Book  of  Deuteronomy,  for  that  work  was  evidently  a 
revised  edition  of  the  Ephraimite  legislation,  and,  as  can 
be  shown,  when  it  was  written  the  Ephraimite  decalogue 
still  preceded  the  Book  of  the  Covenant,  in  other  words, 
was  recognized  as  the  decalogue  given  to  Moses  at 
Sinai.  On  the  other  hand,  it  can  hardly  be  attributed 
to  a  second  Deuteronomist,  since,  in  that  case,  it  would 
have  had  one  form  in  both  Exodus  and  Deuteronomy, 
or  the  form  in  which  it  appeared  in  the  latter  book 
would  have  shown  marks  of  its  originality;  whereas, 
the  form  actually  found  in  Deuteronomy  differs  from 
that  in  Exodus,  and,  when  they  are  compared,  the  latter 
appears  the  more  original.  It  is  probable,  therefore, 
that  this  third  decalogue  was  substituted  for  the  second 
in  the  compilation  made  from  the  Judean  and  Ephraim 
narratives  (JE)  about  650  B.C.,  and  that  it  was  copied 
thence,  with  modifications,  by  the  author  or  authors 
who  revised  and  enlarged  Deuteronomy.  This,  there- 
fore, is  the  proper  place  to  discuss  its  significance  in 
the  history  of  Hebrew  ethics. 

The  difference  between  the  first  two  decalogues  and 
the  third  is  striking  and  important.  The  earlier  ones, 
as  has  been  shown,  consisted  entirely  of  commands  and 
prohibitions  of  a  purely  reHgious  character.  The  last, 
on  the  other  hand,  has  only  four  such,  the  other  six 
having  to  do  with  ethical  relations.  This  fact,  when 
one  gives  it  thought,  is  not  surprising.  It  has  more  than 
once  been  noted  that  the  Hebrews,  when  first  they 
became  a  people,  were  ethically  undeveloped,  but  that, 
as  the  generations  succeeded  one  another,  and  especially 
in  the  prophetic  period,  they  made  conspicuous  progress. 


176        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

It  was  therefore  natural  that  in  time  they  should  come 
to  realize  that  the  fathers  had  given  too  great  prominence 
to  the  outward  forms  of  religion  and  that  their  decalogues 
did  not  represent  the  will  of  the  ethical  Being  whom 
they  were  worshiping.  Jeremiah  was  very  confident 
on  the  subject.  His  declaration  with  reference  to 
it'  is  classic.  He  introduces  it  with  the  ironical 
exhortation,  "Add  your  burnt  offerings  to  your  sacri- 
fices and  eat  flesh."  Then,  in  the  name  of  Yahweh, 
he  hurls  at  his  auditors  the  abrupt  and  startling  state- 
ment, "I  did  not  speak  to  your  fathers,  or  command 
them,  in  the  day  that  I  brought  them  forth  from  the  land 
of  Eg3^t,  concerning  a  burnt  offering  and  sacrifice; 
but  this  thing  I  commanded  them,  saying:  Hearken 
to  my  voice,  and  I  will  be  your  God,  and  ye  shall  be 
my  people;  and  walk  ye  in  all  the  way  that  I  command 
you,  that  it  may  be  well  with  you."  This  is  the  con- 
viction which,  when  it  had  taken  hold  of  the  leading 
spirits  among  the  Jews  toward  the  end  of  the  seventh 
century  before  the  Christian  era,  bore  fruit  in  a  new 
decalogue  in  which  the  ethical  requirements  of  their 
rehgion  found  fitting  representation,  and  to  which  was 
finally  given  the  place  of  honor  in  the  history  of  Hebrew 
legislation. 

The  significance  of  this  decalogue,  then,  is  not  in 
its  Mosaic  origin,  for  either  of  the  others  has  a  better 
claim  to  such  a  distinction.  Nor  is  it  so  much  in  any 
novelty  of  its  commandments,  for  they  are  all  but  one 
found  in  the  earlier  legislation,  and  half  of  them  had 
been  put  into  writing  by  the  Babylonians  long  before 
there  was  a  Hebrew  people.    The  tenth  commandment 

^  Jer.  7:21  flf. 


THE  DEUTERONOMIC  ETHICS  177 

is  not  entirely  new,  since  it  simply  shifts  the  prohibition 
from  overt  acts  to  the  disposition,  from  which,  as 
Baentsch  puts  it,  ''as  from  a  root,  most  sins  by  men 
against  one  another  proceed."  No;  the  significance 
of  this  decalogue  is  not  in  any  such  pecuHarity,  but  in 
the  fact  that  it  registered  the  triumph  of  the  prophets 
and  their  ideas  over  formalism  and  established  the 
fundamental  importance  of  morality  in  the  Hebrew 
reHgion,  for  in  it  man^s  duties  to  man  are  put  upon 
the  same  level  with  his  obligations  to  his  Maker. 

The  original  form  and  content  of  this  decalogue 
accorded  with  its  fundamental  character.  Note  the 
quaUfier,  "original."  It  means  that  these  command- 
ments are  not  now  in  the  form  that  they  must  have 
had  when  they  were  first  brought  together;  that,  as 
can  easily  be  shown,  some  of  them  have  been  greatly 
expanded.  It  is  probable  that  they  all  then  had  the 
brief,  concise  form  that  some  of  them  have  preserved, 
and  read  about  as  follows : 

1.  Thou  shalt  have  no  other  gods  besides  me. 

2.  Thou  shalt  not  make  thyself  a  graven  image. 

3.  Thou  shalt  not  take  the  name  of  Yahweh  thy  God 
in  vain. 

4.  Remember  to  keep  the  Sabbath  day  holy. 

5.  Honor  thy  father  and  thy  mother. 

6.  Thou  shalt  not  kill. 

7.  Thou  shalt  not  commit  adultery. 

8.  Thou  shalt  not  steal. 

9.  Thou  shalt  not  bear  false  witness  against  thy 
neighbor. 

10.  Thou  shalt  not  covet  thy  neighbor's  house. 


1 78        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  number  of  the  command- 
ments, though  restricted,  as  in  the  case  of  the  other  two 
decalogues,  is  adequate.  It  may  originally  have  been 
suggested  by  the  sum  of  the  fingers  of  the  two  hands, 
and  intended  to  symbolize  completeness.  In  any  case 
the  commandments  themselves  must  be  regarded  as 
symbolical  or  representative.  Thus,  the  last  six,  with 
which  alone  the  present  discussion  is  concerned,  cover  the 
entire  field  of  the  relations  of  men  to  one  another; 
the  fifth  laying  the  foundation  for  human  government; 
the  sixth  to  the  ninth,  protecting  respectively  the  per- 
son, the  home,  property,  and  reputation;  and  the  tenth 
strengthening  the  four  preceding  by  rearing,  as  it  were, 
an  outwork  against  the  violation  of  human  rights.  The 
symboHcal  character  of  this  decalogue  fitted  it  for  the 
place  it  occupies  before  the  Ephraimite  Code,  which 
is,  in  a  sense,  an  expansion  of  its  content.  From  the 
historical  standpoint,  however,  one  must  remember, 
the  decalogue  really  completed  the  development  that 
produced  the  Book  of  the  Covenant. 

3.      THE    SECONDARY    ELEMENT    IN    DEUTERONOMY    AND 

THE  DEUTERONOMIC  ADDITIONS  TO  THE 

EARLIER  NARRATIVES 

The  date  given  for  the  original  of  Deuteronomy  was 
650  B.C.  In  621,  when  it  was  discovered  in  the  temple, 
it  had  been  revised  and  enlarged,  and  the  most  important 
addition  that  had  been  made  was  the  third  decalogue, 
which  had  meanwhile  been  inserted  into  the  compila- 
tion made  from  the  Judean  and  Ephraimite  narratives, 
as  already  described,  and  was  borrowed  thence  by  the 
reviser.    At  the  same  time  it  was  somewhat  modified. 


THE  DEUTERONOMIC  ETHICS  179 

The  changes  made,  though  not  very  important,  deserve 
passing  attention.  In  the  fourth  and  fifth  command- 
ments the  reviser  inserts  the  clause,  "as  Yahweh  thy 
God  commanded  thee,"  to  remind  the  reader  that  he 
was  copying.  In  the  fifth  he  adds,  among  other  things, 
as  a  reason  for  observing  the  Sabbath,  "that  thy  man- 
servant and  thy  maid-servant  may  rest  as  well  as  thou," 
a  purpose  perfectly  in  line  with  the  humane  tendency 
observed  in  the  Deuteronomic  legislation.'  Finally,  in 
the  last  commandment,  he  transposes  "house"  and 
"wife,"  so  that  "house,"  which,  in  Exod.,  chap.  20, 
is  a  general  term  including  the  items  that  follow,  becomes 
a  designation  for  a  mere  dwelling,  while  the  primacy  of  a 
man's  wife  among  his  possessions  is  made  more  explicit. 

There  is  a  considerable  secondary  element  in  Deu- 
teronomy outside  the  Decalogue  and  the  narrative  that 
forms  its  setting,  and  there  are  a  number  of  passages 
having  a  bearing  on  the  ethical  history  of  the  Hebrews. 
It  is  by  no  means  probable  that  all  of  these  passages 
are  from  the  same  hand,  but  they  have  so  much  in 
common  that  any  difference  in  authorship  may,  for 
the  time  being,  be  ignored. 

There  is  one  passage  of  a  general  character,  which 
first  invites  attention.  It  is  supplementary  to  the  law 
concerning  the  king.  This  law  originally  required  only 
that  the  future  ruler  refrain  from  "multiplying"  horses, 
women,  or  gold  and  silver.^  A  later  hand  inserted  the 
requirement  that  he  provide  himself  with  a  private  copy 
of  the  law  then  under  revision  and  "read  therein  all  the 
days  of  his  life."^    In  other  words,  the  author  of  this 

'Deut.  16:11,  14,  etc.  *  Deut.  i7:i8f. 

»Deut.  17:14-17. 


i8o        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

supplementary  clause  demanded  for  the  revised  code  the 
recognition  as  the  law  of  the  land  which  it  received 
from  Josiah  and  his  people  on  its  promulgation  in 
621  B.C. 

The  sanction  thus  given  by  the  later  writer  to  the 
work  of  his  predecessor  forbids  one  to  expect  any 
serious  divergence  between  them.  In  point  of  fact, 
the  difference,  where  there  is  any,  is  mainly  a  matter 
of  emphasis  or  development.  Thus,  they  agree  in 
explaining  the  goodness  of  Yahweh  to  Israel  as  a  display 
of  unmerited  grace,  prompted  by  his  regard  for  the 
fathers,'  but  the  ethical  value  of  the  doctrine  as  taught 
by  them  is  not  the  same,  or  nearly  the  same,  in  both 
cases.  The  elder  writer  puts  his  teaching  most  suc- 
cinctly in  9:5,  where  he  makes  Moses  say,  ''Not  for 
thy  righteousness,  or  for  the  uprightness  of  thy  heart, 
dost  thou  go  in  to  possess  their  (the  Canaanites')  land; 
but  for  the  wickedness  of  these  nations  Yahweh  thy 
God  doth  drive  them  out  from  before  thee,  and  that 
he  may  establish  the  word  which  Yahweh  swore  to  thy 
fathers,  to  Abraham,  to  Isaac,  and  to  Jacob."  Here, 
the  unworthiness  of  Israel  is  clearly  taught,  and  boasting 
on  their  part  "excluded";  but  the  emphasis  is  placed 
upon  the  positive  offenses  of  the  Canaanites,  in  view  of 
which  their  expulsion  becomes  a  notable  illustration  of 
the  moral  character  of  the  divine  government.  Com- 
pare, now,  vss.  6  ff.,  where  the  reviser  repeats  the  denial 
of  merit  just  made,  but,  instead  of  dismissing  the  matter 
in  these  negative  and  general  terms,  adds,  first  a  positive 
indictment,  and  then  a  bill  of  particulars  in  which  he 
recalls  the  various  occasions  during  the  Exodus  when 

»Peut.  7:12b,  7-8a. 


THE  DEUTERONOMIC  ETHICS  i8i 

they  offended  their  God  and  Savior  and  at  the  end  of 
which  he  makes  the  scathing  declaration,  "Ye  have  been 
rebellious  against  Yahweh  from  the  day  that  I  knew 
you."  Finally  he  reminds  them  that  they  would  more 
than  once  have  been  destroyed,  in  spite  of  the  covenant 
with  the  fathers,  if  he  had  not  personally  interceded  for 
them.'  It  is  clear,  especially  when  one  notes  that  one 
of  the  motives  to  which  Moses  says  he  appealed  was 
Yahweh 's  jealousy  for  his  reputation,*  that  here,  as  in 
some  passages  from  an  earlier  reviser  (Rje),  the  grace 
of  Yahweh  is  magnified  at  the  expense  of  his  moral 
character.^ 

The  tendency  to  extravagance  brought  to  Hght  by 
the  above  comparison  has  other  manifestations;  for 
example,  in  the  relative  prominence  of  the  motives  to 
which  the  later  writer  appeals.  The  author  of  the  origi- 
nal work  made  his  first  appeal  to  gratitude.  There  is 
such  an  appeal  in  8 : 2-6,  which  is  immediately  followed 
by  one  to  the  imiversal  desire  of  well-being;  and  in 
this  instance  no  alternative  is  suggested.  When,  as 
in  chap.  28,  he  is  obliged  to  face  the  possibility,  if  not 
the  probabiHty,  that  his  exhortations  will  be  disre- 
garded, he  knows  how  to  picture  the  consequences  of 
incorrigibihty,  but  even  there  he  does  not  dwell  on  the 
"terrors  of  the  Lord"  or  present  the  one  alternative 
without  again  repeating  the  other."*  The  reviser,  on 
the  other  hand,  naturally  appeals  to  fear.  It  is  he  who 
recalls  that,  when  Yahweh  spoke  to  his  people  at  Horeb, 
"the  mountain  burned  with  fire  to  the  heart  of  heaven," 
that  they  might  "learn  to  fear"  their  God  and  transmit 

*Deut.  9:19;  io:iof.  ^  See  pp.  152!. 

'Deut.  9:28.  «Dcut.  28:  i-2Sa,  43-45. 


i82        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

the  feeling  to  their  children,'  and  how  deep  was  the 
impression  made  upon  the  terrified  beholders.*  He 
also  brings  to  remembrance  the  awful  miracles  by 
which  Yahweh  rid  himself  of  his  enemies  during  the 
Exodus,  the  plagues  of  Egypt,  the  overthrow  of  Pharaoh's 
army  in  the  Red  Sea,  and  the  disappearance  of  Dathan 
and  Abiram  and  their  followers  in  the  bowels  of  the 
earth.3  It  is  not  strange,  therefore,  to  find  that  he,  or 
someone  else  who  was  like-minded,  has  added  a  warning 
at  the  end  of  chap.  8,^  greatly  expanded  the  Hst  of 
curses  in  chap.  28,  and  attached  to  the  formal  renewal 
of  the  covenant  with  Yahweh  in  chap.  29  still  another 
warning  in  the  form  of  a  portrayal  of  the  Promised 
Land  smitten  by  a  destruction  as  complete  as  that 
which  overtook  Sodom  and  Gomorrah.^  In  chap.  28, 
which  from  vs.  25b  onward,  except  vss.  43-45,  is  almost 
entirely  secondary,  this  writer  displays  an  almost 
fiendish  ingenuity  in  inventing  horrors  with  which  to 
frighten  his  readers  into  obedience  to  the  preceding 
^'statutes  and  ordinances."  The  result  is  that  he  has 
overshot  his  mark,  the  thoughtful  reader  being  obHged 
either  to  reject  his  message  or  believe  that  the  God  of 
the  Hebrews,  so  far  from  being  just,  is  cruel  and 
vindictive. 

There  is  one  passage  in  which  the  tendency  to 
extravagance  shows  itself  in  specific  legislation.  In 
24:5,  it  will  be  remembered,  the  original  law  provided 
that  a  man  who  had  taken  a  wife  should  "not  go  out 
in  the  host"  or  "be  charged  with  any  business,"  but 
"be  at  home  one  year."     In  chap.  20  the  reviser  intro- 

*Deut.  4:iof.  3  Deut.  11:2-7.  sVss.  loff. 

»  Deut.  5 :  22-27.  ''  Vss.  19  £. 


THE  DEUTERONOMIC  ETHICS  183 

duces  an  extension  of  the  principle  involved  so  broad 
that  it  becomes  impracticable,  for  he  would  exempt 
from  military  service,  just  before  a  battle,  not  only 
the  newly  married,  but  everyone  that  "hath  betrothed 
a  wife,  and  hath  not  taken  her";  or  "built  a  new 
house,  and  hath  not  dedicated  it";  or  "planted  a  vine- 
yard, and  hath  not  used  the  fruit  thereof";  and,  finally, 
anyone  that  is  "fearful  and  fainthearted."^  There  is 
only  one  recorded  instance  of  the  application  of  this 
law,  namely,  by  Judas  Maccabaeus  on  the  eve  of  the 
battle  of  Emmaus.'  The  result  was  what  might  have 
been  expected.  According  to  II  Mace.  8:13,  "they 
that  were  cowardly  and  they  that  had  no  faith  in  the 
justice  of  God  fled  and  betook  themselves  from  the 
place,"  leaving  the  Jewish  army  so  reduced  in  numbers 
that  no  one  but  Judas  would  have  thought  of  risking 
a  battle. 

It  remains  to  notice  the  attitude  of  the  later  writer 
or  writers  in  Deuteronomy  toward  the  unfortunate  and 
aliens.  In  io:i8f.  Moses  declares  that  Yahweh 
defends  the  orphan  and  the  widow;  also  that  he  loves 
the  sojourner,  and  for  this  reason,  and  because  they 
themselves  were  once  sojourners  in  Egypt,  his  people 
must  be  kind  and  helpful  to  this  class  of  persons.  The 
consideration  shown  sojourners  is  in  strong  contrast 
with  the  lack  of  sympathy  or  positive  hostility  dis- 
played by  the  reviser  or  supplementer  toward  those 
who  are  called  foreigners.  An  instance  of  distinct 
discrimination  is  found  in  14:21a,  where  the  Hebrew 
is  instructed  that  he  may  dispose  of  the  flesh  of  an 
animal  that  dies  of  itself  to  the  sojourner  or  the  foreigner, 

»  Vss.  2-9.  '  I  Mace.  3 :  56. 


l84        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

but  may  take  pay  for  it  only  from  the  latter.  The 
indications  of  positive  hostility  to  foreigners  are  more 
numerous.  Thus,  in  2:34  and  3:6  the  author  reports 
with  evident  satisfaction  the  destruction  of  the  Amorites 
east  of  the  Jordan,  together  with  ''the  women  and  the 
Httle  ones'';  and,  in  20:15-18  he  directs  that  the 
peoples  of  Canaan  be  not  treated  as  humanely  as  other 
foreigners,  but  that,  when  their  cities  are  attacked, 
there  be  left  alive  "nothing  that  breathe th.''  To  the 
secondary  stratum  of  the  book  belong  also,  23:4-6  and 
25:17-19,  where  the  disposition  to  keep  alive  the 
hatred  for  foreigners  is  only  too  much  in  evidence. 

When  the  original  of  Deuteronomy  was  under 
discussion  there  was  frequent  occasion  to  notice  ethical 
progress  made  since  the  Ephraimite  Code  was  written. 
It  was  natural  to  expect  that  the  additions  made  to 
Deuteronomy  by  later  writers  of  the  same  school  would 
be  of  the  same  relative  character.  It  must,  however, 
be  confessed  that  such  is  not  the  case;  that  the  passages 
just  examined,  so  far  from  indicating  further  develop- 
ment in  the  right  direction,  betray,  at  least  in  the 
author  or  authors,  a  degree  of  ethical  retrogression. 
This  state  of  things  must  have  had  its  cause  or  causes. 
One  of  them,  if  there  were  several,  may  have  been  the 
doctrine  of  election,  to  which  the  second  D enter onomist 
gives  special  prominence.  Thus,  in  26:16-19  he  repre- 
sents Moses  as  promising  that  Yahweh  will  not  only 
make  Israel  his  peculiar  people,  but  exalt  them  "high 
above  all  (the  other)  nations  that  he  hath  made,  for 
praise,  and  for  fame,  and  for  glory.  "^  It  was  natural 
that  such  a  doctrine  should  in  time  make  the  Hebrews 

^  See  also  Exod.  19:5  f. 


THE  DEUTERONOMIC  ETHICS  185 

forget  the  ethical  requirements  of  their  religion  and 
assrnne  an  attitude  of  contempt  or  cruelty,  according 
to  circumstances,  toward  other  peoples.  It  is  doubtful, 
however,  whether  the  passages  in  question  reflect  a 
widespread  popular  opinion  or  sentiment.  There  seems 
to  be  a  more  plausible  explanation  of  their  tone  and 
content.  The  Deuteronomic  Code  was  originally  the 
result  of  an  attempt  to  adjust  a  body  of  older  laws  to 
the  requirements  of  a  new  set  of  conditions,  and  the 
person  or  persons  who  prepared  it  were  practical  in  their 
views  and  methods.  The  additions  to  this  Code  were 
evidently  made  by  a  man  or  men  of  a  different  stamp. 
They,  if  there  were  more  than  one,  appear  to  have  been 
men,  learned  in  their  way,  but  without  experience  of 
actual  life  and  every-day  affairs.  When  such  persons 
write  history  they  are  apt  to  mingle  fact  and  fiction, 
and,  when  they  frame  legislation,  to  betray  strange 
notions  of  justice.  The  author  of  Deut.  2 :  26  ff.  seems 
to  have  been  one  of  these  scribes.  If  so,  it  is  easy  to 
pictiire  him  transforming  the  defeat  of  Sihon  at  Jahaz 
and  the  occupation  of  his  country  by  the  Hebrews,  as 
described  in  Num.  21:21-24,  into  a  campaign  of  havoc, 
and  slaughter,  and  pillage  in  which  a  nation  perished; 
also  supplying  a  corresponding  account  of  the  conquest 
of  Bashan,  of  which  there  is  no  trace  in  the  earlier 
literature.'  The  recognition  of  the  academic  character 
of  the  secondary  element  in  Deuteronomy  explains  all 
the  instances  of  extravagance  cited,  but  it  is  especially 
helpful  in  studying  the  twenty-eighth  chapter.    This 

'Deut.  3:1-7.  See  Num.  22:2  and  Josh.  24:8,  where  it  should 
have  been  mentioned.  The  brief  account  in  Num.  21 :  33-35  is  supposed 
to  have  been  derived  from  Deuteronomy. 


i86        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

long  discourse,  as  has  already  been  observed,  bristles 
with  terrors,  the  effect  of  which,  in  their  extravagance, 
is  to  benumb  or  offend  the  reader's  ethical  judgment. 
If,  however,  they  are  largely  the  literary  fantasies  of  a 
Jewish  scribe,  this  fact  should  be  taken  into  account, 
and  any  such  unfortunate  experience  avoided. 

When  Deuteronomy  was  added  to  the  composite 
work  that  preceded  it,  not  only  it  but  the  work  into  which 
it  was  incorporated  was  revised  by  the  new  compiler 
from  the  later  Deuteronomic  standpoint.  Some  of 
these  additions  are  of  a  harmonistic  character.  The 
secondary  account  of  the  conquest  of  Bashan  in  Num. 
21:33-35  has  already  been  cited.  There  are  three  such 
passages  in  Exodus,  namely,  22:25,  forbidding  discount, 
like  Deut.  23:19,  and  22:22  and  23:9,  which  have  their 
parallel  in  Deut.  24: 17  f.  There  is  only  one  that  marks 
an  advance  beyond  the  Deuteronomic  Code,  Exod. 
23:4  f.,  where  Deut.  22:1-4  is  so  modified  as  to  require 
that  a  stray  animal  be  returned,  or  a  fallen  one  assisted, 
even  when  the  owner  is  known  to  be  a  personal  enemy. 
The  change  here  made,  however,  means,  not  that  the 
Hebrews,  when  it  was  made,  had  learned  to  hate  their 
enemies  less,  but  that  they  had  come  to  love  animals 
more  and  would  not  permit  them  to  suffer  to  spite  the 
owners. 

There  are  two  passages  in  which  there  is  an  emphasis 
on  the  idea  of  retribution,  such  as  one  would  expect  of 
a  Deuteronomic  writer.  These  are:  Exod.  34:7b, 
where  the  words  from  "and  that  will  by  no  means," 
or  "altogether,"  "acquit,"  etc.,  seem  to  be  an  accretion; 
and  II  Sam.  12:10-12,  where  Nathan's  arraignment 
and  David's  confession  are  separated  by  a  prediction 


THE  DEUTERONOMIC  ETHICS  187 

of  Absalom's  rebellion  as  a  penalty  for  the  wrongs  the 
king  had  committed  against  Uriah. 

The  rest  of  the  passages  that  deserve  notice  in  this 
connection,  almost  all  of  them,  have  to  do  with  the 
relations  of  the  Hebrews  with  foreigners.  The  first  two, 
Exod.  23:3ib-33  and  34:12  f.,  15  f.,  reproduce  the 
prohibition  of  treaties  or  marriages  with  the  Canaanites 
and  the  injunction  to  destroy  the  native  population 
without  mercy,  the  originals  of  which  are  found  in 
Deut.  7 : 2  f .  Here  belong  considerable  portions  of  the 
Book  of  Joshua.  There  is  some  difference  of  opinion 
concerning  their  extent,  but  there  can  be  little  doubt 
that  they  include  10:28-43,  11:10-23,  ^^^  ^^^  whole  of 
chap.  12.  These  passages  must  be  read  with  the  same 
reserve  and  allowance  as  the  later  parts  of  Deuteronomy, 
for  they  exempUfy  the  same  tendency  to  extravagance 
that  was  there  discovered.  This  time,  however,  the 
object  of  the  author  is  not  so  much  to  enforce  the  doc- 
trine of  retribution  as  to  increase  the  renown  of  Joshua. 
Thus,  in  10:28  ff.  he  ascribes  to  Joshua  the  conquest  of 
the  whole  of  southern  Palestine,  whereas  the  older 
authorities  give  him  credit  only  for  the  defeat  of  the 
coalition  against  Gibeon  and  the  execution  of  the  five 
kings  who  belonged  to  it,'  the  Judean  narrative,  frag- 
ments of  which  are  preserved  in  the  first  chapter  of 
Judges,  saying  distinctly  that  southern  Palestine,  so 
far  as  it  was  conquered,  was  conquered  and  occupied  by 
the  tribes  of  Judah  and  Simeon,  and  that  it  was  Caleb 
who  actually  took  Hebron,  and  his  son-in-law  who 
captured  Debir.*    This,  however,  is  not  so  objectionable 

*  Josh.  10:5  in  part;  vs.  10  in  part;  vss.  16-18,  24,  26. 
"  Judg.  1:3,  5  f.,  19,  21  (where  "Judah"  should  be  substituted  for 
"Benjamin"),  20,  the  three  names  from  vs.  10,  11-15,  ^7' 


i88       THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

as  the  statement,  which  occurs  in  some  form  no  fewer 
than  eleven  times  in  chapters  lo  and  ii,  that,  as  often 
as  Joshua  took  a  city,  he  put  to  death  the  entire  popula- 
tion, and,  finally,  that  Yahweh  instigated  the  Canaanites 
"to  come  against  Israel  in  battle,  for  the  purpose  of 
destroying  them."^ 

It  is  a  relief  not  to  be  obliged  to  believe  the  Hebrew 
leader  to  have  been  such  a  monster;  also  to  be  able 
to  acquit  David  of  similar  atrocities,  for,  according  to 
the  critics,  II  Sam.  8:2,  where  the  king  is  said  to  put 
to  death  two-thirds  of  his  Moabite  prisoners,  and  vs.  4, 
where  he  is  reported  to  have  hocked  all  but  a  hundred 
of  the  horses  taken  from  the  king  of  Zobah,  are  Deutero- 
nomic  interpolations.  The  same  is  true  of  I  Kings 
2:53.,  where  David  is  represented  as  laying  upon 
Solomon  the  dying  injunction  not  to  let  the  hoary  heads 
of  Joab  and  Shimei  "go  down  in  peace  to  Sheol,"  as 
if  the  writer  were  trying  to  save  the  credit  of  the  son 
at  the  expense  of  the  father's  honor. 

^  Josh.  II : 20;  also  Exod.  10: ib. 


CHAPTER  XIV 

THE  PROPHECIES  OF  ZEPHANIAH,  HABAKKUK,  AND 
NAHUM 

It  seemed  necessary  to  follow  the  Deuteronomic  line 
of  development  nearly  to  the  close  of  the  seventh 
century.  Otherwise  it  would  have  been  difficult  to 
appreciate  its  importance  to  the  study  of  Hebrew  ethics. 
Meanwhile  some  of  the  prophets  had  to  be  neglected. 
Three  of  these,  because  they  all  belonged  to  the  latter 
part  of  the  century  and  naturally  had  more  or  less  in 
common,  as  well  as  because  they  were  among  the 
minor  contributors  to  the  prophetical  literature,  may 
be  grouped  together  in  this  chapter. 

I.      ZEPHANIAH 

The  Book  of  Zephaniah  is  dated  in  the  reign  of 
Josiah,  but,  since  the  king  is  not  mentioned,  except  in 
the  title,  while  the  Scythian  invasion  seems  to  be  fore- 
shadowed, it  is  probable  that  the  prophecies  it  contains 
were  uttered  or  written  before  Josiah  became  of  age, 
perhaps  about  628  B.C.  They  are  directed,  first, 
against  Jerusalem,  or  its  ruling  classes,  but  also  against 
Philistia,  Ethiopia,  and  Ass3n:ia. 

The  prophet  sees  and  hears  a  great  crisis  approaching. 
The  great  day  of  Yahweh,  he  says,  "is  near  and  hasteth 
greatly."^  There  is  to  be  a  general  and  inevitable 
catastrophe.  All  alike  must  suffer.  "Neither  their 
silver  nor  their  gold  will  be  able  to  deliver  them  in  the 

'  Zeph.  1 :  14. 

189 


igo        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

day  of  Yahweh's  wrath;  but  the  whole  earth  (not 
"land")  will  be  devoured  by  the  fire  of  his  jealousy; 
for  he  will  make  an  end,  yea,  a  terrible  end,  of  all  them 
that  dwell  in  the  earth."^  He  does  not  make  clear  just 
what  the  other  nations  have  done  to  deserve  the  punish- 
ment threatened,  but  with  reference  to  his  own  people 
he  is  more  specific.  It  is  the  old  story,  a  replica,  as 
far  as  it  goes,  of  the  indictment  brought  against  Israel 
by  Amos  and  Hosea,  and  applied  to  Judah  by  Isaiah 
and  Micah.  The  first  count  is  unfaithfulness  to  Yahweh, 
shown,  not  only  in  deserting  him  for  other  deities,  but 
in  following  the  syncretic  tendency  of  the  day  and 
paying  a  divided  allegiance  to  him  and  the  gods  of  the 
neighboring  nations.^  It  was  natural  that  those  who 
had  proved  disloyal  to  Yahweh  should  be  found  unfaith- 
ful in  their  relations  with  their  fellows.  As  usual,  the 
ruling  classes  are  the  chief  offenders.  In  Zeph.  i:8f. 
the  princes  and  the  courtiers  are  expressly  mentioned 
as  guilty  of  "violence  and  deception.''  In  3:3f.  they 
are  associated  with  the  judicial  and  the  religious  authori- 
ties. The  princes  of  Jerusalem,  the  prophet  declares, 
are  "roaring  lions;  her  judges  are  evening  wolves; 
they  leave  nothing  till  the  morrow.  Her  prophets  are 
reckless  and  treacherous  persons;  her  priests  have 
profaned  the  sanctuary,  they  have  done  violence  to 
instruction."^  The  whole  spirit  and  conduct  of  these 
leaders  is  contrary  to  the  will  and  character  of  Yahweh. 
He  is  "righteous;  he  doeth  not  injustice.  Every 
morning,  without  fail  bringeth  he  his  justice  to  Hght."^ 
There  are  some,  the  hiunble  of  the  land,  who  have 

»  Zeph.  I :  i8. 

» II  Kings  21 : 1  ff.,  19  ff.;    23:55. 

3Hos.  4:6.  "Zeph.  3:5. 


ZEPHANIAH,  HABAKKUK,  AND  NAHUM        191 

wrought  righteousness  before  Yahweh.  They  are  en- 
couraged to  continue,  not  forgetting  to  preserve  their 
attitude  of  humiHty  toward  their  God,  for  thus  only  can 
they  hope  to  receive  protection  "in  the  day  of  Yahweh's 
anger.'"  The  prophet  expects  that  a  remnant  will  sur- 
vive the  coming  visitation.  Indeed,  he  promises  that 
there  shall  remain  a  people  chastened  and  weakened,  who 
shall  take  refuge  in  the  name  of  Yahweh,  and  that  this 
"remnant  of  Israel  shall  not  do  injustice  or  speak  lies."^ 
The  attitude  of  Zephaniah  toward  foreigners  is  much 
Hke  that  of  the  second  Deuteronomist,  and  for  the  same 
reasons.  Thus,  he  condemns,  not  only  the  foreign 
custom  of  leaping  over  the  threshold,  but  also  the 
foreign  garments  in  which  those  who  surroimded  the 
king  clothed  themselves.  He  foresees  the  devastation 
of  Philistia,^  the  punishment  of  Ethiopia,  and  the  over- 
throw and  destruction  of  Assjnria.* 

2.     HABAKKUK 

The  Book  of  Habakkuk — or  the  first  two  chapters 
of  it — as  appears  when  1:5-11  is  removed  from  its 
present  connection  and  inserted  after  2:4,  has  for  its 
subject  the  overthrow  of  Assyria.  That  great  nation  is 
here  arraigned  for  getting  other  nations  into  its  power 
by  treachery ,5  for  robbing  them,  even  to  the  poorest,^ 
for  treating  them  with  violence  and  cruelty ,7  and  for 

*  Zeph.  2:3.  3  Zeph.  2:4!.,  7a.  s  Hab.  i :  13. 

^Zeph.  3:13.  <Zeph.  2:12-14.  ^Hab.  2:6, 9. 

7Hab.  1:2  fiF.,  i3ff.;  2:15.  In  1:14  it  is  clear  that  "makest" 
is  an  error  for  "  maketh."  See  vss.  15  £f.  In  2 :  15  read  "  Woe  to  him  that 
giveth  his  neighbor  to  drink  from  the  cup  of  his  wrath,  and  even  maketh 
them  drunken,  that  he  may  look  upon  their  nakedness."  See  Jer. 
25:155.;  Nah.  3:11.  The  reference  to  intoxicating  drink  is  purely- 
figurative. 


192        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

destroying  them  without  mercy.'  In  this  case  the 
agent  that  Yahweh  purposes  to  use  in  punishing  the 
guilty  nation  is  the  Chaldeans. 

In  this  book  the  ethical  standing  of  the  Jews  as 
compared  with  the  Assyrians  is  clearly  represented  as 
superior;  for  it  is  probably  the  writer's  own  people 
who  are  the  righteous  of  1:4,  and  more  than  probable 
that  this  is  the  case  in  2:4,  where  the  sufferers  are 
assured  that  "the  just  shall  Hve  by  his  faithfulness/' 
that  is,  survive  the  present  distress  if,  and  because,  he 
remains  faithful  to  Yahweh." 

3.     NAHUM 

The  last  two  chapters  of  the  Book  of  Nahum,  which 
alone  can  safely  be  attributed  to  the  prophet  of  that 
name,  are  wholly  directed  against  Nineveh.  They 
must,  therefore,  have  been  written  before  606  B.C., 
the  date  of  its  fall,  and,  indeed,  not  long  before  that 
event.  In  other  words,  Nahum,  like  Habakkuk,  was 
a  younger  contemporary  of  Jeremiah. 

The  significance  of  the  prophecies  of  Nahum,  from 
the  ethical  standpoint,  is  not  at  once  apparent,  but,  on 
closer  study,  they  will  be  found  to  be  in  line  with  the 
results  already  obtained.  Indeed,  Nahum,  like  Amos, 
takes  for  granted  a  universal  moral  responsibihty,  and 
condemns  the  Assyrians  for  the  same  inhuman  practices, 
bloodshed,  robbery,  and  intrigue,^  of  which  the  earlier 
neighbors  of  the  Hebrews  were  found  guilty.-*    So  just, 

*Hab.  1:17;  2:12,  17. 

2  The  psalm  in  the  third  chapter  is  generally  assigned  to  a  later 
date  than  the  rest  o£  the  book. 

3Nah.  3:1,  4.  <  Amos  1:35. 


ZEPHANIAH,  HABAKKUK,  AND  NAHUM        193 

therefore,  seem  the  penalties  he  pronounces  against 
them,  that  he  confidently  expects  all  who  hear  of  their 
execution  to  "clap  their  hands"  in  approval.' 

It  should  be  noted  that  in  this  book  there  is  no 
indication  of  the  ethical  or  religious  condition  of  the 
Jews.  It  seems  to  be  assumed  that  they  are  suffering, 
not  through  their  own  fault,  but  from  the  unprovoked 
cruelty  of  their  heathen  masters.    See  Habakkuk. 

^Nah.  3:19. 


CHAPTER  XV 
JEREMIAH  AND  HIS  TIMES 

Jeremiah  began  his  prophetic  activity  in  the  thir- 
teenth year  of  Josiah  (626  B.C.),  which  was  some  time 
after  the  original  of  Deuteronomy  was  written,  but 
five  years  before  the  book  was  made  public.  He  was 
naturally  acquainted  with  this  work,  and  influenced 
by  it.  This  influence,  however,  is  more  apparent  in 
his  language'  than  in  his  ideas;  for  he  was  too  great  a 
man  to  be  Umited  in  his  thinking  by  any  code  or  move- 
ment of  the  period  in  which  he  lived. 

Jeremiah  was  a  unique  and  solitary  character.  He 
realized  this  from  the  start.  In  the  first  of  his  prophe- 
cies, where  he  tells  the  story  of  his  call,  he  represents 
Yahweh  as  concluding  the  revelation  then  made  with 
these  personal  words:  ^*Do  thou,  therefore,  gird  thy 
loins,  and  arise  and  speak  to  them  all  that  I  command 
thee.  Be  not  dismayed  on  account  of  them,  lest  I  dis- 
may thee  before  them.  As  for  me,  lo,  I  have  this  day 
made  thee  a  fortified  city,  and  an  iron  pillar,  and  bronze 
walls  to  the  kings  of  Judah,  its  princes,  its  priests,  and 
the  people  of  the  land ;  and  they  shall  war  against  thee, 
but  they  shall  not  overpower  thee,  for  I  am  with  thee, 
saith  Yahweh,  to  rescue  thee."* 

While  he  was  yet  at  Anathoth  he  had  experience  of 
opposition  and  isolation.    There  are  no  details,  except 

*  Colenso  was  led  by  the  similarity  in  language  between  the  two 
books  to  ascribe  them  both  to  Jeremiah.  See  The  Pentateuch,  III, 
618;  Vn,  225  ff-;  App.,  8s  ff. 

»Jer.  i:i7fif. 

IQ4 


JEREMIAH  AND  HIS  TIMES  195 

the  statement  that  his  neighbors  forbade  him  on  pain 
of  death  to  prophesy  further  in  the  name  of  Yahweh.' 
When  he  went  to  Jerusalem  he  very  soon  incurred  the 
enmity  of  both  the  priests  and  the  prophets,  whom  he 
describes  as  plotting  against  him,  saying,  ''Come  and 
let  us  devise  devices  against  Jeremiah."^  The  reason 
they  gave  for  their  hostility  was,  "for  instruction  shall 
not  be  wanting  to  the  priest,  or  counsel  to  the  wise,  or  a 
message  to  the  prophet";  which,  being  interpreted, 
means  that  he  had  questioned  their  authority.  They 
did  not  then  propose  very  severe  measures  against  him, 
only  to  ''smite  him  with  the  tongue,"  and  "not  give 
heed  to  any  of  his  words."  They  did  not,  however, 
long  pursue  this  mild  course.  "In  the  beginning  of  the 
reign  of  Jehoiakim,"  when  he  predicted  the  destruction 
of  the  temple,  "they  laid  hold  on  him,"  and  he  was 
rescued  from  death  only  by  the  firmness  of  the  princes 
and  the  finesse  of  his  friend  Ahikam.^  He  now  began 
to  feel  himself  so  much  "alone"  that  he  nearly  lost  his 
faith  in  Yahweh,  and  had  to  be  rebuked  for  his  weak- 
ness and  strengthened  by  a  repetition  of  the  promise  he 
had  received  at  the  beginning  of  his  ministry .^  When 
Nebuchadrezzar  appeared  in  Palestine,  the  prophet 
became  increasingly  unpopular,  until  he  heard  his 
former  friends  urging  one  another  to  entrap  him  that 
they  might  denounce  him  to  the  authorities  and  wreak 
vengeance  on  him.^  Finally,  as  he  was  leaving  the  city 
to  go  to  Anathoth,  he  was  arrested  as  a  deserter  and 
imprisoned  by  the  same  princes  who  had  previously 
defended  him,**  and  he  remained  a  prisoner,  alternately 


^  Jer.  11:21. 

3jer.  26: iff. 

s  Jer.  2o:ioflF. 

»Jer.  18:18. 

4jer.  is:i5ff. 

6Jer.37:iiff. 

196       THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

abused  and  consulted,  until  the  city  fell  into  the  hands 
of  the  Chaldeans.^ 

The  conduct  of  Jeremiah  under  the  conditions  to 
which  he  was  subjected  is  one  of  the  noblest  examples  of 
moral  heroism  in  the  history  of  mankind.  It  is  almost 
impossible  to  realize  the  number  and  power  of  the  forces 
arrayed  against  him.  At  the  outset  his  incessant  war- 
fare upon  idolatry  naturally  offended  those  who  wor- 
shiped other  gods  than  Yahweh.  The  emphasis  he 
placed  upon  ethics  stirred  to  the  most  determined 
opposition,  on  one  side,  the  priests,  and,  on  the  other, 
the  immoral  rabble.  When  he  foretold,  as  he  felt  he 
must,  the  capture  of  Jerusalem,  the  overthrow  of  the 
Davidic  dynasty,  and  the  devastation  of  the  country, 
he  unmasked  the  false  prophets,  touched  the  pride  of 
the  ruling  classes,  and  provoked  a  storm  of  patriotic 
frenzy.  Now,  it  is  easy  to  see  that  a  man  as  sensitive 
as  Jeremiah  would  suffer  sorely  under  so  severe  and 
so  universal  condemnation,  but  even  more  acutely 
because  his  people  had  incurred  the  divine  displeasure 
and  he  himself  must  not  only  act  as  the  mouthpiece  of 
Yahweh,  but  witness  the  distressful  fulfilment  of  his 
own  predictions.  It  is  not  strange  that,  facing  such  a 
situation,  he  cursed  the  day  he  was  born,  and  demanded, 
"Wherefore  should  I  have  come  forth  out  of  the  womb, 
to  see  labor  and  sorrow,  I  whose  days  have  been  spent 
in  shame?"*  Yet  he  could  not  but  hear  the  fateful 
message,  and,  when  he  had  heard,  he  could  not  with- 
hold it.  "If,"  he  explains,  "I  should  say,  I  will  not 
make  mention  of  him,  or  speak  again  in  his  name,  there 
would  be  in  my  heart  as  it  were  a  burning  fire  shut  up 

'Jer.  38:iflf.  »Jer.  20:14  ff. 


JEREMIAH  AND  HIS  TIMES  197 

in  my  bones,  and  I  should  weary  of  restraining  myself, 
and  should  not  be  able  to  endure  i t . '  ^'  Therefore,  however 
fiercely  he  might  be  beset  by  enemies,  honest  or  corrupt, 
and  however  deeply  he  might  be  pained  by  his  own 
message,  he  never,  as  far  as  appears,  held  his  peace  for 
any  length  of  time,  or  thought  of  refusing  to  declare 
to  those  to  whom  he  was  commissioned  "the  whole 
counsel  of  Gk)d." 

The  isolation  of  Jeremiah  had  a  notable  effect  upon 
him  and  his  teaching.  In  the  first  place,  it  threw  him 
back  upon  himself  to  a  greater  extent  than  was  the 
case  with  any  of  the  other  prophets,  and  forced  him 
to  seek  in  himself,  and  God  as  revealed  to  his  conscious- 
ness, the  approval  and  appreciation  that  were  denied 
him  by  those  for  whom  he  lived  and  labored.  The 
residt  was  an  ethical  and  religious  experience  of  a 
singularly  intimate  and  personal  character,  which  now 
and  then  shows  itself  in  his  prophecies.  The  central 
thought  in  Jeremiah's  discourses  is  that  God  is  just. 
It  was  because  he  beUeved  this  with  all  his  heart,  and 
saw  that  his  people  deserved  the  severest  punishment, 
that  he  predicted  as  confidently  as  he  did  their  disper- 
sion. He  never  had  any  doubt  on  this  subject;  but, 
when  he  attempted  to  apply  the  same  doctrine  in  his 
own  personal  alBfairs,  he  was  sometimes  tempted  to 
question  the  divine  justice,  and  he  was  too  honest  to 
conceal  his  weakness.  One  of  the  passages  in  which 
he  opens  his  heart  to  Yahweh  and  the  reader  is  Jer. 
12:1  fif.  It  is  a  confession  made  when  he  found  that 
his  neighbors  in  Anathoth  were  seeking  his  life.  He  was 
profoundly  conscious  of  his  own  rectitude.     "Thou, 

^  Jer.  20:9. 


1 98        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

0  Yahweh/'  he  exclaims,  ^'knowest  me;  thou  seest  me, 
and  triest  my  heart  toward  thee."  It  seemed  to  him 
that  those  who  plotted  the  death  of  such  a  man  as  he 
should  be  punished,  and  that  severely.  When  he  saw 
that  they  were  not  hurried  away  ^'Kke  sheep  for  slaugh- 
ter" he  could  not  understand  it.  Still,  he  dared  not 
say  that  Yahweh  was  not  just.  This  is  the  way  he 
put  the  matter:  *' Righteous  art  thou,  O  Yahweh, 
when  I  contend  with  thee";  that  is,  I  know  that  thou 
must  be  righteous;  "yet  would  I  reason  the  cause  with 
thee,"  cite  a  case  for  decision.  "Wherefore  doth  the 
way  of  the  wicked  prosper?  Wherefore  are  they  all 
at  ease  that  deal  very  treacherously?"  The  reply  to 
his  appeal  shows  that  he  was  really  telling  his  own 
experience.  It  is  not  an  explanation,  but  a  rebuke: 
"If  thou  hast  run  with  the  footmen,  and  they  have 
wearied  thee,  then  how  canst  thou  contend  with  horses  ?" 
which  means.  If  thy  faith  is  not  strong  enough  to  support 
thee  in  thy  present  trials,  what  wilt  thou  do  when 
greater  ones  overtake  thee?    In  15: 15  if.  the  story  is 

repeated.    "0  Yahweh,"  he  cries,  "thou  kno west 

Wilt  thou  indeed  be  to  me  as  a  deceitful  brook,  as 
waters  that  fail?"  This  time,  after  a  deserved  rebuke, 
he  receives  the  assurance,  "I  am  with  thee,  to  save 
and  deliver  thee."  There  was  a  third  struggle,  of 
which  there  is  a  record  in  Jer.  20:7  ff.  This  passage, 
however,  according  to  Cornill,  should  be  rearranged, 
so  that  vss.  14-18  will  precede  vss.  7-12.  Thus  read, 
it  describes  the  prophet's  experience  when  he  was  put 
into  the  stocks  by  Pashur.  It  was  then  that  he  cursed 
the  day  he  was  born,  as  already  narrated.  Then  he 
appealed  to  Yahweh,  "0  Yahweh,  thou  hast  beguiled 


.       JEREMIAH  -AND  HIS  TIMES  199 

me,  and  I  have  been  beguiled.  Thou  hast  laid  hold 
of  me  and  hast  prevailed.  I  am  become  a  laughing- 
stock all  the  day;  every  one  mocketh  me."  Finally  he 
overcomes  his  doubts  and  fears  and  exclaims,  ^'But 
Yahweh  is  with  me  as  a  terrible  warrior:  therefore  my 
persecutors  shall  stumble,  and  not  prevail;  they  shall  be 
greatly  ashamed,  because  they  have  not  succeeded,  with 
an  everlasting  dishonor  that  shall  never  be  forgotten." 
Thus  he  preserved  to  the  end  a  faith  in  God's  justice  in 
spite  of  the  persecution  to  which  he  was  subjected. 

The  personal  experience  of  Jeremiah  was  calculated 
to  make  him  an  individualist  in  ethics  as  in  religion. 
This  was  not  the  prevalent  attitude.  The  Hebrews, 
like  other  ancient  peoples,  thought  of  themselves 
collectively.  The  individual  was  lost  in  the  family, 
the  tribe,  and  the  nation.  If,  therefore,  he  acted 
worthily,  the  whole  of  which  he  was  a  part  shared  the 
credit  of  his  conduct,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  if  he 
offended,  the  same  body  shared  his  accountability. 
There  had  been  dissent  from  this  requirement  before 
Jeremiah.  It  had  crystallized  into  the  law  found  in 
Deut.  24:16  according  to  which  "the  fathers  shall  not 
be  put  to  death  for  the  children,  neither  shall  the 
children  be  put  to  death  for  the  fathers;  every  man  shall 
be  put  to  death  for  his  own  sin."  Jeremiah  insisted 
that  this  was  the  law  of  the  divine  government.  He 
repudiated,  therefore,  the  proverb  that  embodied  the 
traditional  error,  "The  fathers  have  eaten  sour  grapes, 
and  the  children's  teeth  are  set  on  edge,"  and  announced, 
"Every  one  shall  die  for  his  own  iniquity;  the  man  that 
eateth  the  sour  grapes,  his  teeth  shall  be  set  on  edge.'" 

*  Jer.  31:29  f. 


200        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

The  prophet  went  beyond  Deuteronomy,  for  he 
applied  the  principle  of  individualism,  not  only  to 
successive  generations,  but  to  contemporaries,  and  that 
in  the  same  connection/  The  passage  is  a  remarkable 
one.  It  reads,  "Lo,  the  days  come,  saith  Yahweh, 
when  I  will  make  a  new  covenant  with  the  house  of 
Israel,  and  with  the  house  of  Judah;  not  according  to 
the  covenant  that  I  made  with  their  fathers  in  the  day 
that  I  took  them  by  the  hand  to  bring  them  out  of  the 
land  of  Egypt  (which  covenant  they  brake,  although 
I  was  a  husband  to  them);  but  this  is  the  covenant 
that  I  will  make  with  the  house  of  Israel  in  those  later 
days,  saith  Yahweh:  I  will  put  my  law  within  them, 
yea,  in  their  hearts  will  I  write  it."  The  Hebrew  reads, 
literally,  "their  heart,''  and  the  phrase  is  so  rendereq 
into  English,  but  this  is  the  Hebrew  idiom  for  "their 
hearts,"  that  is,  the  individual  hearts  of  the  people 
composing  the  nation.  Naturally,  therefore,  the  prophet 
proceeds  to  say,  "And  they  shall  teach  no  more  every 
man  his  brother,  saying.  Know  Yahweh;  for  they  shall 
all  know  me  from  the  least  to  the  greatest  of  them, 
saith  Yahweh." 

The  importance  of  this  doctrine  cannot  be  over- 
estimated, since  it  enabled  the  Jews,  when  their  temple 
was  destroyed,  and  their  people  scattered,  to  maintain, 
each  for  himself,  an  ethical  and  religious  life,  wherever 
he  might  wander. 

Jeremiah  was  a  "fortress"  and  an  "iron  tower" 
in  more  than  one  sense.  He  was  as  conspicuous  as  he 
was  invincible.  His  life,  therefore,  was  a  constant 
sermon  on  courage  and  fidelity  to  conviction.    This 

»Jer.  31:31-34. 


JEREMIAH  AND  HIS  TIMES  20i 

being  the  case,  he  did  not  need  in  so  many  words  to 
commend  these  virtues  to  his  people.  He  did,  however, 
have  occasion  to  deal  with  various  phases  of  domestic 
and  social  ethics.  In  so  doing  he  did  not  fail  to  empha- 
size the  relation  of  ethics  to  rehgion.  He  was  thoroughly 
in  accord  with  the  movement  that  resulted  in  the  sub- 
stitution of  the  decalogue  of  Exod.,  chap.  20,  for  those 
of  the  earlier  narratives.  His  position  is  clear  from 
Jer.  6:20,  where  he  represents  Yahweh  as  saying, 
"To  what  purpose  cometh  there  to  me  frankincense 
from  Sheba  and  calamus  from  a  far  country?  Your 
burnt  offerings  are  not  acceptable,  or  your  sacrifices 
pleasing  to  me";  because  his  people  had  rejected  his 
instruction.  In  7 : 8  ff .  Yahweh  serves  notice  on  the 
immoral  as  well  as  the  disloyal  that  they  must  not 
appear  as  worshipers  in  his  sanctuary.^  The  strongest 
utterance  in  the  Book  of  Jeremiah  on  this  subject  is 
7:21  if.,  where  Yahweh  is  made  to  say,  "Add  your 
burnt  offerings  to  your  sacrifices  and  eat  flesh.  For 
I  spake  not  to  your  fathers,  nor  did  I  command  them 
in  the  day  that  I  brought  them  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt, 
concerning  a  burnt  offering  and  a  sacrifice:  but  this 
thing  I  commanded  them,  saying,  Hearken  to  my  voice, 
and  I  will  be  your  God,  and  ye  shall  be  my  people,  and 
walk  ye  in  the  way  that  I  command  you,  that  it  may  be 
well  with  you."^ 

Jeremiah  found  the  family  as  an  institution 
threatened  by  the  prevalence  of  adultery.  This  state 
of  things  was  doubtless  due  to  the  reaction  under 
Manasseh,  who  "did  that  which  was  evil  in  the  sight 
of  Yahweh  after  the  abominations  of  the  nations  that 

^ See  also  Jer.  11:15.  'See  also  Jer.  1 1 ; i  ff. 


202        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

Yahweh  cast  out  before  the  children  of  Israel,"  and 
under  Amon,  who  "walked  in  the  way  that  his  father 
walked  in,  and  served  the  idols  that  his  father  served, 
and  worshiped  them."'  When  Josiah  came  to  the 
throne  there  was  at  first  a  tendency  to  syncretism, 
against  which  Jeremiah  protested.  "Will  ye  ...  . 
commit  adultery  ....  and  burn  incense  to  Baal, 
and  walk  after  other  gods  that  ye  have  not  known,  and 
come  and  stand  before  me,  in  the  house  that  is  called 
by  my  name,  and  say,  We  are  dehvered;  that  ye  may 
do  all  these  abominations?"  In  another  passage  he 
says  that  the  land  is  "full  of  adulterers."^  Among  the 
offenders  against  marital  virtue  in  his  time  were  some, 
at  least,  of  the  prophets.  The  nature  of  the  offense  is 
clear  enough  from  23:135.  In  vs.  13  the  prophet 
recalls  the  folly  of  Samaria.  The  prophets  of  that 
kingdom,  now  destroyed,  "prophesied  by  Baal,"  he 
says,  and  caused  the  people  "to  stray"  from  Yahweh, 
that  is,  commit  adultery  in  the  figurative  sense  of  the 
expression.  But  he  adds,  vs.  14,  "In  the  prophets  of 
Jerusalem  also  I  have  seen  what  is  horrible,  committing 
adultery,  and  walking  in  falsehood,  and  strengthening 
the  hands  of  evil-doers  not  to  turn  each  from  his  wicked- 
ness. They  have  all  become  to  me  as  Sodom,  and 
its  inhabitants  as  Gomorrah."  Here  it  is  manifestly 
literal  adultery  that  he  has  in  mind,  as  appears  from  the 
association  of  the  sin  in  question  with  falsehood,  and 
especially  from  the  reference  to  the  cities  of  the  Plain. 
See  also  9: 23,  where  the  prophet,  in  a  letter  to  the  Jews 
in  Babylonia,  says  of  Ahab  and  Zedekiah,  who  were 
predicting  their  speedy  restoration,  that  "they  have 
'  n  Kings  21 : 2,  20.  » Jer.  23 :  10. 


JEREMIAH  AND  HIS  TIMES  203 

wrought  folly  in  Israel  and  committed  adultery  with 
their  neighbor's  wives."  In  view  of  this  expose  of  the 
condition  of  morals  among  those  who  should  have  been 
Jeremiah's  allies,  it  is  no  wonder  that  his  efforts  to 
reform  and  rescue  his  people  ended  in  failure. 

Jeremiah,  like  Hosea,  uses  the  marital  relation  to 
illustrate  the  moral  character  of  that  between  God  and 
Israel.  Thus,  he  recalls  the  earliest  and,  according  to 
him,  the  happiest,  period  of  Israel's  history,  making 
Yahweh  say  in  Jer.  2:1  f.,  "I  remember  for  thee  the 
kindness  of  thy  youth,  the  love  of  thine  espousals; 
how  thou  wentest  after  me  in  the  desert,  in  a  land 
that  was  not  sown";  and,  in  31:32  (according  to  the 
present  text),  "my  covenant  they  brake,  although  I 
was  a  husband  to  them."  See  also  2:20;  3:20;  11:15; 
13:27,  where  the  unfaithfulness  of  Israel  is  vividly 
portrayed. 

There  is  a  passage  in  which  is  described  how  the 
prophet  made  use  of  another  domestic  relation  to  illus- 
trate a  rehgious  lesson.  It  is  the  story  of  his  interview 
with  the  Rechabites.  He  invited  them  to  the  temple 
and  offered  them  wine  to  drink.  Now,  their  ancestor 
Jonadab  had  forbidden  them  to  drink  wine.  They 
therefore  refused  it.  The  prophet  commended  them 
for  so  doing,  and  took  occasion  to  contrast  their  obedi- 
ence with  the  disregard  by  his  people  of  the  commands 
of  Yahweh.  This  incident  is  a  favorite  with  the  advo- 
cates of  total  abstinence,  who  find  in  it  support  for 
their  cause.  The  prophet,  however,  who  himself 
probably  drank  wine,  as  did  most  of  the  people  in  his 
day,  had  no  such  thought.  He  employed  the  wine 
simply  as  a  test  of  the  loyalty  of  the  Rechabites  to  their 


204        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

ancestor.  He  might  have  chosen  either  of  several 
others,  for  this  Jonadab,  as  a  nomad,  also  forbade  his 
descendants  to  build  houses,  sow  seed,  or  plant  vine- 
yards. If  he  had  done  so,  the  result  would  have  been 
the  same.  Yet,  no  one  would  have  thought  of  quoting 
Jeremiah  against  the  custom,  for  example,  of  building 
houses  instead  of  living  in  tents. 

There  was  a  humane  provision  in  the  Ephraimite 
Code  limiting  the  term  for  which  a  Hebrew  could  be 
held  in  slavery  to  six  years.^  When  the  code  was  recast 
this  particular  law  was  retained  and  the  master  exhorted 
to  deal  generously  with  the  released  bondman.^*  The 
law,  however,  had  apparently  not  been  observed. 
In  the  reign  of  Zedekiah,  therefore,  there  were  many 
Hebrews  who  had  been  held  to  service  beyond  the  term 
specified.  When  Jerusalem  was  besieged  by  the  Baby- 
lonians, the  king,  hoping  to  propitiate  Yahweh,  or 
prevent  an  internal  disturbance,  persuaded  the  people 
to  release  their  slaves;  but  later,  probably  when  there 
seemed  to  be  a  prospect  of  help  from  the  Egyptians,^ 
they  repented  of  their  humanity  and  **  caused  the 
servants  and  the  handmaids  whom  they  had  let  go 
free,  to  return,  and  brought  them  (again)  into  subjection 
for  servants  and  handmaids. ""»  This  they  did  in  viola- 
tion of  a  solemn  covenant  made  in  the  temple  at  Jerusa- 
lem. Jeremiah  was,  of  course,  indignant,  and  in  the 
name  of  Yahweh  announced  that  as  a  penalty  for  this 
act  of  perfidy  the  Chaldeans  should  return,  the  capital 
be  taken  and  burned,  and  the  entire  kingdom  of  Judah 
be  reduced  to  "a  desolation,  without  an  inhabitant."* 

^Exod.  21:2.  »Jer.  37:55.  «Jer.  34:17  fif. 

»Deut.  is:i2ff.  4jer.34:8ff. 


JEREMIAH  AND  HIS  TIMES  205 

When  one  inquires  what  Jeremiah  taught  on  the 
subject  of  social  ethics,  one  is  struck  with  the  elementary 
character  of  that  teaching.  Indeed,  when  one  consid- 
ers the  decalogue  of  Exod.,  chap.  20,  and  Deut.,  chap.  5, 
and  remembers  that  the  offenses  there  forbidden,  so  far 
as  they  were  social,  had  been  forbidden  among  the 
Hebrews  for  centuries,  one  cannot  but  ask  if  there 
was  any  other  reason  than  the  one  already  given,  the 
growing  recognition  of  the  relation  of  ethics  to  religion, 
for  such  a  decalogue.  The  prophecies  of  Jeremiah 
throw  some  light  upon  this  question;  for  it  will  be 
found  that,  in  spite  of  the  heroic  endeavors  of  preceding 
prophets,  the  Jews  of  his  time  were  so  indifferent  to 
one  another's  rights  that  all  the  forbidden  offenses  were 
of  common  occurrence.  If  one  goes  deeper  and  inquires 
why  this  was  the  case,  a  probable  answer  will  be  found 
in  the  disturbed  condition  of  Palestine  as  a  whole  and 
the  weakness  of  the  Jewish  government. 

It  was  a  period  of  decadence,  and  Jeremiah  was  trying 
to  turn  back  the  tide  of  corruption.  He  was  very  clear 
in  his  ideas  concerning  the  requirements  of  the  social 
relation.  The  prime  demand,  to  his  mind,  was  justice 
tempered  with  mercy  between  man  and  man.  This  is 
finely  put  in  Jer.  9:23,  where  Yahweh  says,  ^'Let  not 
the  wise  man  glory  in  his  wisdom,  or  the  mighty  man  in 
his  might,  or  the  rich  man  in  his  riches;  but  let  him 
that  glorieth  glory  in  this,  that  he  hath  understanding 
and  knoweth  me,  that  I  am  Yahweh,  who  do  kindness, 
and  justice,  and  righteousness  in  the  earth;  for  in 
these  I  delight,  saith  Yahweh." 

The  ideal  king  will  naturally  be  one  who  conforms 
to  this  requirement.    This  is  Jeremiah's  description  of 


2o6        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

him:  ^'Lo,  the  days  are  coming  when  I  will  raise  up  to 
David  a  righteous  Branch,  and  he  shall  reign  as  king, 
and  deal  wisely,  and  do  justice  and  righteousness  in  the 
land.  In  his  days  Judah  shall  be  saved  and  Israel  shall 
dwell  safely;  and  this  shall  be  the  name  whereby  he 
shall  be  called,  Yahweh  our  righteousness.'"  Jeremiah 
would  gladly  have  helped  the  four  weaklings  who,  one 
after  another,  ascended  the  throne  during  his  career, 
to  attain  some  likeness  to  this  picture.  In  Jer.  21:12 
he  urges  Zedekiah  to  ''execute  prompt  (literally,  ''in  the 
morning")  justice,  and  deliver  him  that  is  robbed  out  of 
the  hand  of  the  oppressor."  To  the  last  he  continued 
to  exhort  the  king  and  his  subjects  to  the  same  effect, 
citing  Josiah  as  an  example  of  the  result  of  such  con- 
duct.^ He  searched  Jerusalem  to  find  a  man  who  did 
justly  and  sought  truth,^  but  found  none  who  pleaded 
the  cause  of  the  fatherless,  or  helped  the  needy  to 
secure  their  rights. "»  He  offered  them  in  the  name  of 
Yahweh  deliverance  from  the  impending  catastrophe, 
if  they  would  "thoroughly  execute  justice  between  man 
and  man,"s  but  they  went  their  stubborn,  reckless  way 
unheeding. 

A  man's  life,  especially  that  of  a  poor  man,  was  not 
safe  in  those  days.  Jeremiah  repeatedly  accuses  his 
people  of  murder.  What  made  their  guilt  the  greater 
was  that  they  felt  no  compunctions  for  their  violent 
proceedings,  probably  because  they  shed  innocent 
blood  under  the  forms  of  law,  and  therefore  in  the  name 
of  the  God  they  were  offending.  In  2 :  34  f .  the  prophet 
represents   them   as  protesting  their  innocence  when 

ijer.  23:5f.  ^ Jer.  5:1.  ^      s Jer.  7:5. 

»  Jer.  22:3,  15.  4  Jer.  5:28. 


JEREMIAH  AND  HIS  TIMES  207 

caught  red-handed,  and  in  7:10  as  even  claiming  the 
protection  of  Yahweh  in  their  criminal  practices/ 

In  the  same  connection  Jeremiah  accuses  his  people 
of  oppression,  including  the  minor  forms  of  violence  by 
which  the  rich  and  powerful  made  the  lives  of  those  who 
were  poorer  and  weaker,  and,  indeed,  of  the  prophet 
himself,  a  burden  to  them.^ 

Those  who  do  not  respect  their  neighbors'  persons 
cannot  be  expected  to  have  scruples  about  stealing. 
The  Jews  of  Jeremiah's  time  did  not;  but  he  did  not 
permit  them  to  steal  unrebuked.  He  mentions  theft 
first  in  the  Ust  of  offenses  of  which  he  finds  them  guilty 
in  7:9.  Later  he  warns  those  who  get  riches  "and  not 
by  right"  that  they  cannot  hope  to  retain  their  ill-gotten 
gains,^  and  finally  pronounces  a  woe  upon  "him  that 
buildeth  his  house  by  unrighteousness,  and  his  chambers 
by  injustice;  that  useth  his  neighbor's  service  without 
wages,  and  giveth  him  not  his  hire;  that  saith,  I  will 
build  me  a  wide  house  and  spacious  chambers,  and 
cutteth  him  out  windows;  and  it  is  ceiled  with  cedar 
and  painted  with  vermilion.  "^ 

The  English  Version  makes  the  impression  that 
Jeremiah  followed  robbery  to  its  source  in  illegitimate 
desire.  The  original  does  not  warrant  such  a  rendering. 
The  word  rendered  "  covetousness "  in  Jer.  6:13  is  more 
nearly  "plunder,"  that  is,  gain  gotten  by  violence  or 
dishonesty.  So,  also,  in  8:10.  In  both  of  these  cases 
the  parallel  term  is  "falsehood,"  but  in  22:17  it  is 
associated  with  three  other  words  denoting  violence. 
These  passages   should   therefore   be  added  to  those 

^  See  also  Jer.  22:3,  17.  sjer.  17:11. 

^Jer.  7:6;   22:3,  4jer.  22:i3f. 


2o8        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

previously  cited  in  condemnation  of  theft  and  robbery. 
Not  that  the  prophet  would  not  have  condemned 
covetousness,  properly  so  called.  It  would  find  no 
place  under  the  new  covenant,  with  the  law  of  God 
written  in  the  hearts  of  his  people.^ 

A  second  general  requirement  in  social  matters, 
according  to  Jeremiah,  is  truth  in  the  broad  sense  that 
includes  trustworthiness.  This  also  is  pleasing  to 
Yahweh.  His  eyes,  therefore,  according  to  5:3,  "look 
for"  (E.V.,  "upon")  it.  It  was,  however,  sadly  lack- 
ing in  any  sense  in  Jeremiah's  day.  He  sought  it  in 
Jerusalem  in  vain.^  In  7:28  he  declares  that  "truth 
is  perished."  In  this  last  passage  he  refers  more  par- 
ticularly to  the  prevalence  of  falsehood,  which  he 
describes  as  veritably  epidemic  among  his  people. 
"They  bend  their  tongues,"  he  says,  "like  a  bow  for 
falsehood,"^  and  again,  "They  deceive  every  one  his 
neighbor,  and  do  not  speak  the  truth;  they  have  taught 
their  tongues  to  speak  lies;  they  weary  themselves  with 
dishonesty."'*  He  charges  that  they  cannot  be  trusted, 
"although  they  say,  As  Yahweh  liveth,"^  that  is,  even 
when  they  take  oath  to  their  assertions.  An  example 
of  this  sort  is  found  in  chaps.  42  f.,  where  the  story  is 
told  how  the  survivors  from  the  massacre  at  Mizpah 
came  to  Jeremiah,  promising,  "Yahweh  be  a  true  and 
faithful  witness  against  us,  if  we  do  not  according  to  all 
the  word  wherewith  Yahweh  thy  God  shall  send  to  us, 
whether  it  be  good  or  whether  it  be  evil";  and  how, 
when  the  prophet  in  the  name  of  Yahweh  urged  them 
to  stay  in  their  own  country  and  submit  to  the  king  of 

'Jer.  31:33.  3jer.  9:3.  »Jer.  5:2. 

'Jer.  5:1.  *Jer.  9:5. 


JEREMIAH  AND  HIS  TIMES  209 

Babylonia,  they  accused  him  of  falsehood,  and  migrated 
to  Egypt,  taking  him  with  them  in  spite  of  his  protest. 

The  falsity  of  Jeremiah's  time  showed  itself,  not 
only  in  wanton  statements,  but  in  treacherous  con- 
spiracies. Thus,  the  prophet  early  in  his  career  received 
the  inner  warning,  *'Thy  brethren,  and  the  house  of  thy 
father  (Anathoth),  even  they  have  dealt  treacherously 
with  thee;  even  they  have  cried  aloud  after  thee; 
beHeve  them  not,  although  they  speak  fair  words  to 
thee.'''  A  little  later  he  could  say  of  his  people  generally 
that  they  were  ''an  assembly  of  treacherous  men,"^ 
and  issue  the  warning,  ''Take  ye  heed  every  one  of  his 
neighbor,  and  trust  ye  not  in  any  brother,  for  every 
brother  will  surely  supplant,  and  every  neighbor  will 
go  about  slandering.  "3  There  were  some  who  resorted 
to  cunning  and  deception  to  get  wealtk  Jeremiah 
says  of  them:  "They  watch  as  fowlers  lie  in  wait;  they 
set  a  trap,  they  catch  men.  Like  a  cage  full  of  birds, 
so  are  their  houses  full  of  (the  fruits  of)  deception: 
therefore  are  they  become  great,  and  have  waxed  rich."'' 

The  passages  thus  far  quoted  apply  to  the  people  as 
a  whole,  or  to  a  large,  but  indefinite,  proportion  among 
them.  There  are  others  in  which  the  prophet  is  more 
specific.  One  of  the  most  interesting  and  important 
is  Jer.  8:8.  The  persons  here  addressed  are  the  people, 
whom  the  prophet  has  just  accused  of  ignorance  of  the 
government  of  Yahweh.  He  anticipates  their  answer. 
It  is,  "We  are  wise,  and  the  law  of  Yahweh  is  with  us"; 
or,  more  freely  rendered,  "Nay,  rather,  we  are  familiar 
with  it.     Have  we  not  the  law  of  Yahweh  with  us?" 

^  Jer.  12:6.  3  Jer.  9:4. 

»Jer.  9:2.  4  Jer.  s:26f. 


2IO        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

To  this  he  retorts,  "But  the  false  pen  of  the  scribe  hath 
wrought  falsely."  This  passage  must  be  interpreted  in 
the  light  of  7:2iff.  There,  it  will  be  remembered, 
Jeremiah  repudiates  offerings  and  sacrifices  as  essentials 
of  religion,  and  denies  that  Yahweh  gave  command- 
ment concerning  them  when  he  brought  Israel  out  of 
Egypt.  This  being  the  case,  the  false  scribes  here  men- 
tioned must  be  the  priests  who,  two  verses  later,  as  well 
as  in  6 :  13,  are  accused  of  deahng  falsely,  and  whose  false 
work  probably  consisted  in  changes  and  additions  bear- 
ing on  reUgious  observances  in  the  law  with  which  the 
people  claimed  to  be  famiUar.  It  appears,  therefore, 
that  already  in  Jeremiah's  day  the  priests  had  begun 
to  put  into  writing  ceremonial  requirements  which  they 
represented  as  divinely  ordained,  but  which  he  refused 
to  recognize  as  original  or  essential  elements  of  the 
national  religion  and  binding  upon  its  adherents. 

It  is  possible  that  some  of  the  prescriptions  of  the 
Levitical  law  now  found  in  the  Pentateuch  were  put 
into  written  form  about  this  time,  but  it  would  be 
difficult  to  identify  them.  There  is,  however,  in  the 
Book  of  Jeremiah  itself  a  sacerdotal  interpolation  which, 
although,  of  course,  it  is  later,  fairly  illustrates  the 
tendency  that  the  prophet  was  combating.  It  is  33 :  14, 
a  more  elaborate  version  of  23:5-8,  the  well-known 
messianic  prophecy  in  the  first  two  verses  of  which 
Yahweh  promises  to  "raise  up  to  David  a  righteous 
Branch"  whose  name  shall  be  called  "Yahweh  our 
righteousness."  The  interpolator  transfers  this  name 
from  the  Branch  to  Jerusalem  and  adds,  vss.  17  f., 
"For  thus  saith  Yahweh,  David  shall  never  want  a  man 
to  sit  on  the  throne  of  the  house  of  Israel;  neither  shall 


JEREMIAH  AND  HIS  TIMES  211 

the  priests  the  Levites  want  a  man  before  me  to  offer 
burnt  offerings  and  to  do  sacrifice  continually. "  Then, 
to  strengthen  this  amendment,  he  says  further,  vss.  19-22, 
in  the  name  of  Yahweh  and  Jeremiah:  "If  ye  can  break 
my  covenant  of  the  day  and  my  covenant  of  the  night, 
so  that  there  shall  not  be  day  and  night  in  their  season, 
then  may  also  my  covenant  be  broken  with  David  my 
servant,  that  he  shall  not  have  a  son  to  reign  on  his 
throne,  and  with  the  Levites,  the  priests,  my  ministers. 
As  the  host  of  heaven  cannot  be  numbered,  or  the  sand 
of  the  sea  measured,  so  will  I  multiply  the  seed  of  David 
my  servant,  and  the  Levites  that  minister  to  me." 

The  prophet  is  very  severe  on  the  priests,  but  more 
so  on  the  prophets  of  his  time.  He  constantly  couples 
the  two  orders,  both  of  which  were  bitterly  hostile  to 
him,  but  he  gives  most  prominence  to  the  latter,  because, 
as  he  says,  the  priests  are  controlled  by  them.'  The 
prophets  whom  Jeremiah  so  severely  criticized  and  so 
strenuously  opposed  were  not  false  in  the  sense  of  being 
prophets  of  Baal  or  any  other  false  god  or  gods.  They 
claimed  to  be  mouthpieces  of  Yahweh.^  To  be  sure, 
they  generally  received,  or  professed  to  receive,  their 
messages  in  dreams,  but  this  had  always  been  a  per- 
fectly legitimate  means  of  communication  between  God 
and  man. 3  The  prophet's  complaint  is  that  they  are 
steeped  in  the  prevalent  dishonesty ,"*  that  they  not 
only  presume  to  prophesy  without  Yahweh's  authority,^ 

^Jer.  5:31. 

2jer.  14:14  f.;  23:17,  25,  30;  etc.  In  2:8,  26;  23:13,  and  32:32 
the  prophet  is  not  referring  to  his  own  time,  but  to  the  past,  and  especially 
that  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel. 

3Num.  12:6;  Deut.  i3:iff.  •♦Jer.6:i3;  8:10. 

sjer.  14:14!.;  23:14;  27:15;  29:8!.,  23,31. 


212        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

but  to  issue  lies  in  his  name/  and  that  they  thus  cause 
his  people  to  trust  in  falsehood.^  The  last  passage  cited 
indicates  what  was  the  nature  of  the  lies  in  which  these 
prophets  dealt.  They  were  optimistic  messages  for 
which  Jeremiah  could  find  no  warrant.  Sometimes 
they  were  attempts  to  quiet  the  fear  of  retribution  in 
their  authors  or  others  equally  wicked,^  but  sometimes 
the  authors  of  them  must  have  been  misled,  for  example, 
by  national  pride,  or  the  mistaken  interpretation  of  the 
messages  of  former  prophets.  The  latter  suggestion 
explains  such  passages  as  7 :4,  where  the  reference  to  the 
temple  as  a  pledge  of  divine  protection  is  probably  an 
echo,  but  a  belated  one,  of  the  teaching  of  Isaiah. 

Jeremiah  had  no  occasion  for  personal  hostility  to 
foreigners,  but  the  contrary.  When  he  was  seized  by 
the  princes  and  imprisoned,  it  was  an  Ethiopian  eunuch 
who  rescued  him  from  the  cistern  into  which  they  had 
thrown  him,'»  and  when  Jerusalem  was  taken  the  Baby- 
lonians not  only  spared  him  but  treated  him  with  the 
greatest  consideration. ^  His  previous  attitude  toward 
them  warranted  such  treatment,  for,  although  he  knew 
that  they  were  to  conquer  and  devastate  his  country, 
he  was  so  clear  about  their  commission  from  Yahweh 
that  he  showed  no  resentment  toward  them.  As  for 
the  surrounding  peoples,  he  could  not  help  seeing  that 
they,  like  Judah,  must  go  down  before  Nebuchadrezzar, 
but  he  makes  no  specific  charges  against  them  and 
manifests  no  pleasure  in  the  prediction  of  their  downfall. 
See  25:155. 

'Jer.i4:i4;  23:25f.;  27:9^,14;  29:21,23. 
»Jer.  28:15.  4jer.  38:iff. 

3  Jer.  23: 14 f.;  29: 23.  s  jer.  39: 11  ff. 


CHAPTER  XVI 

THE  DEUTERONOMIC  ELEMENT  IN  THE  BOOKS 
OF  KINGS 

There  is  a  Deuteronomic  element  in  the  Books  of 
Kings  as  well  as  in  those  that  precede  them,  with  this 
difference,  that,  whereas,  in  Samuel,  for  example,  it 
consists  of  additions  to  a  previously  existing  work,  in 
Kings  the  framework  throughout  is  Deuteronomic  as 
well  as  some  other  and  later  portions.  In  other  words, 
the  history  of  Israel  from  the  accession  of  Solomon 
onward  is  presented  from  the  Deuteronomic,  and,  indeed, 
the  later  Deuteronomic  standpoint.  When,  therefore, 
reference  is  made  to  the  law  of  Yahweh,^  or  the  law  of 
Moses,*  or  the  commandments,  statutes,  and  judgments 
of  Yahweh,^  it  is  Deuteronomy  in  substantially  its 
completed  form  that  is  intended,  especially  those  portions 
of  it  that  deal  with  exclusive  devotion  to  Yahweh  and  the 
centralization  of  his  worship  at  Jerusalem. 

Naturally  the  author  has  little  that  is  favorable  to 
say  about  the  kingdom  of  Israel.  In  fact,  he  condemns 
its  rulers,  one  after  another,  without  exception.  Jero- 
boam, he  says,  started  them  on  a  heretical  course  when 
he  ''made  two  calves  of  gold"  and  ''set  the  one  in 
Bethel  and  put  the  other  in  Dan.'^^    ^'Xhis  thing," 

ai  Kings  10:31;  17:13,34,37;  21:8. 
'H  Kings  14:6;  21:8;  23:25. 

3 1  Kings  2:3;  3:14;  5:12;  8:58,61;  9:46;  11:33!.,  38;  II 
17:13,  16,  19,34,37;  18:6;  23:3. 
*  I  Kings  12  f. 

ai3 


214        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

he  declares,  ''became  a  sin,"^  and  thereby  he  "caused 
Israel  to  sin."^  The  all  but  uniform  statement  is  that 
the  given  ruler  ''did  that  which  was  evil  in  the  sight 
of  Yahweh,  and  walked  in  the  way  of  Jeroboam,  and 
in  his  sin  wherewith  he  made  Israel  to  sin."^  This  is 
for  some  reason  modified  in  the  case  of  Hoshea,  who  is 
said  to  have  done  "that  which  was  evil  in  the  sight  of 
Yahweh,  yet  not  as  the  kings  of  Israel  that  were  before 
him. "4  There  is  not  a  word  from  this  writer  to  indicate 
how  well  or  ill  any  of  them  performed  his  duties  to  his 
subjects,  even  in  the  general  review  in  which  he  gives 
the  reasons  for  the  overthrow  and  dispersion  of  the 
northern  tribes.^  It  was  because  they  had  "feared 
other  gods,''  "built  them  high  places  in  their  cities," 
and  "served  idols,"  that  "Yahweh  was  very  angry  with 
Israel,  and  removed  them  out  of  his  sight." 

The  kings  of  Judah  are  measured  by  the  same 
standard.  The  result  in  their  cases  is  more  favorable, 
yet  the  best  of  them,  like  Asa,  fall  short  in  that,  however 
loyal  they  may  otherwise  have  been,  the  author  is 
obHged  to  admit  that  in  their  reigns  "the  high  places 
were  not  taken  away."^  Of  the  worst  he  can  say 
nothing  more  severe  than  that  they  "walked  in  the  way 
of  the  kings  of  Israel.  "^ 

It  is  clear  that  one  cannot  expect  much  specific 
teaching  of  a  strictly  ethical  character  from  this  writer. 
There  are,  however,  a  few  passages  in  which  one  gets 
glimpses  of  his  attitude  toward  certain  practices. 
Thus,  in  I  Kings  14:24  he  refers  to  the  presence  of 

» I  Kings  12 :  30.  4 II  Kings  17:2.  ^  I  Kings  15 :  14,  etc. 

» I  Kings  14:16.  5 II  Kings  17:75.  ?  II  Kings  16:3. 

3  1  Kings  15:34. 


DEUTERONOMIC  ELEMENT  IN  KINGS         215 

sodomites  in  the  land,  and  in  15:12  mentions  with 
approval  the  banishment  of  them  by  Asa.  It  is  a 
Deuteronomic  passage^  in  which  the  number  of  Solomon's 
wives  and  concubines  is  recorded,  but  it  is  evident  that 
the  writer  objected  less  to  the  size  of  the  harem  than 
to  the  foreign  women  of  whom  it  was  largely  composed 
and  by  whom  the  king  was  led  away  from  Yahweh. 
There  is  a  passage  that  would  indicate  greater  sensi- 
tiveness to  purely  ethical  considerations.  It  is  I  Kings 
15:5,  where  the  commendation  bestowed  upon  David 
to  the  effect  that  he  always  did  "that  which  was  right 
in  the  eyes  of  Yahweh"  is  qualified  by  the  addition  of 
the  words,  "save  only  in  the  matter  of  Uriah  the  Hittite." 
Since,  however,  these  additional  words  are  wanting  in 
the  Greek  Version,  it  is  probable  that  the  compiler  of 
the  Books  of  Kings,  like  the  Chronicler,  simply  ignored 
a  sad  blot  on  the  virtue  and  honor  of  the  national  hero.^ 
The  Book  of  the  Covenant,  in  Exod.  21:6  and  22 : 8  f., 
requires  that  in  certain  cases  an  oath  be  administered 
"before  God,"  that  is,  at  the  nearest  local  sanctuary. 
The  original  Deuteronomist  so  modified  the  law  that, 
in  the  case  of  a  servant  who  refused  to  leave  his  master, 
the  ceremony  making  him  a  perpetual  bondman  should 
be  performed  at  the  home  of  the  master.^  It  was  also 
ordained  in  the  Deuteronomic  Code  that  matters  which 
could  not  be  settled  by  the  local  authorities  should  be 
brought  to  the  place  that  Yahweh  had  chosen  for 
adjudication.'*  There,  according  to  the  original  text 
of  the  passages  cited,  they  were  to  be  laid  before  the 

*I  Kings  ii:i  ff. 

'  Cf.  II  Sam.  10:12  and  I  Chron.  19:1  ff. 

sDeut.  15:17.  4Deut.  i7:8ff.;  ig:!;!. 


2i6        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

civil  judge,  or  judges,  then  in  office,  but  the  present 
reading  makes  *'the  priests"  joint  arbiters  in  the  cases 
in  question.'  The  Deuteronomic  author  of  I  Kings 
8:31  f.  seems  to  ignore  the  civil  magistrates,  making 
Solomon  in  his  prayer  allude  only  to  the  settlement 
of  disputes  at  the  altar  of  the  new  sanctuary.  This 
does  not,  however,  argue  any  lack  of  interest  in  justice, 
for  he  puts  into  the  mouth  of  the  king  a  petition  that 
Yahweh  may  guide  the  proceedings,  "condemning  the 
wicked,  by  bringing  his  way  upon  his  own  head,  and 
justifying  the  righteous,  by  giving  him  according  to  his 
righteousness." 

There  are  one  or  two  exceptions  to  the  rule  that 
in  the  Books  of  Kings  the  Deuteronomic  standard  is 
religious  rather  than  ethical.  One  of  them  is  found  in 
II  Kings  14:6,  where  it  is  related,  with  evident  approval, 
that,  when  Amaziah  came  to  the  throne,  he  slew  the 
men  who  had  assassinated  his  father,  but  refrained  from 
putting  to  death  their  children,  in  accordance  with  the 
law  of  Deut.  24:16,  where  it  is  forbidden  to  put  to 
death  fathers  for  children  or  children  for  fathers.  Of 
course,  it  is  doubtful  if  the  law  quoted  had  been  formu- 
lated in  Amaziah's  day,  but  that  is  a  question  which  is 
not  of  consequence  in  this  connection.  The  point  is 
that  the  author  recognized  the  principle  involved  and 
commended  its  alleged  adoption  by  Amaziah. 

Here  should  be  cited,  also,  II  Kings  21 :  16  and  24:4, 
where  one  of  the  charges  against  Manasseh  and 
Jehoiakim  is  that  they  ''filled  Jerusalem  with  innocent 
blood." 

^  In  the  Greek  of  Deut.  17:9  the  words  rendered  "unto  the  priests 
the  Levites  and"  are  wanting. 


DEUTERONOMIC  ELEMENT  IN  KINGS  217 

The  attitude  of  the  compiler  of  the  Books  of  Kings 
toward  foreigners  has  already  been  noted  in  connection 
with  the  reference  to  Solomon's  harem.'  It  was  hostile 
because  the  king's  foreign  wives  led  their  common 
husband  away  from  the  national  God.  It  would 
naturally  have  been  different  had  they,  forgetting 
their  own  peoples  and  the  houses  of  their  fathers,^ 
made  his  people  their  people  and  his  God  their  God.^ 
It  is  not  strange,  therefore,  to  find  that,  in  I  Kings 
8:41  ff.,  Solomon  is  represented  as  commending  to  the 
favor  of  Yahweh  the  foreigner  who  comes  from  a  far 
country  to  worship  in  the  temple  at  Jerusalem. 

In  this  connection  mention  should  be  made  of  an 
interesting  inconsistency  in  the  first  Book  of  Kings. 
In  5:13  it  is  distinctly  stated  that  Solomon  made  the 
levy  of  laborers  sent  to  Lebanon  "out  of  all  Israel"; 
but  a  later  writer,  jealous  for  the  reputation  of  the 
king,  inserted  9: 20-22,  where  the  reader  is  informed  that 
it  was  not  Hebrews  who  were  impressed  into  this  service, 
but  "the  people  that  were  left  of  the  Amorites,  the 
Hittites,  the  Perizzites,  the  Hivites,  and  the  Jebusites, 
who  were  not  of  the  children  of  Israel,"  who  then 
became  "bondservants  unto  this  day." 

^  I  Kings  II :  I  ff.  »  Ps.  45 :  10.  3  Ruth  i :  16. 


CHAPTER  XVII 
EZEKIEL  AND  HIS  TIMES 

Ezekiel,  like  Jeremiah,  was  a  priest,  but  there  is 
little  else  in  which  they  resembled  each  other.  Thus, 
Ezekiel  seems  to  have  been  younger  than  Jeremiah 
and  to  have  survived  the  latter  some  years.  It  was 
also  Ezekiel's  fortune  to  be  carried  into  captivity  with 
Jehoiachin  (597  B.C.),  and  thenceforth  to  be  associated 
with  the  better  class  of  his  people,  while  Jeremiah  went 
to  Egypt  with  the  dregs  of  the  population.  Again, 
it  was  Ezekiel's  mission  to  foster  and  develop  the  hope 
of  restoration  which  Jeremiah  had  been  permitted  only 
to  kindle.  Finally,  Ezekiel  was  so  constituted  that  he 
saw  in  religious  institutions  and  observances  more 
value  and  importance  than  Jeremiah  had  ever  attributed 
to  them.  Not  that  he  neglects  ethical  considerations. 
Indeed,  he  gives  to  the  relation  between  Yahweh  and  his 
people  a  distinctly  ethical  character,  using  for  this 
purpose  the  figure  employed  by  Hosea  and  Jeremiah, 
and  developing  it  more  fiilly  than  either  of  them. 
Thus,  in  Ezek.,  chap.  16,  Yahweh  is  represented  as 
recalling  the  history  of  Judah  as  the  career  of  an  unfaith- 
ful wife.  The  same  figure  is  employed  in  chap.  23, 
but  in  a  somewhat  different  form.  Here,  also,  Israel 
and  Judah  are  sisters,  called  respectively  Oholah  and 
Oholibah,  but  this  time  they  are  both  wives  of  Yahweh 
and  both  play  the  harlot. 

The  use  made  of  the  above  illustration  shows  that 
Ezekiel   reckoned   idolatry,    without   reference   to   its 

218 


EZEKIEL  AND  HIS  TIMES  ^ig 

peculiar  observances,  an  offense  against  morality,  like 
murder  or  adultery.  He  classes  it  with  such  offenses 
in  chap.  i8,  where  he  describes  the  just  man  as  one  who 
"hath  not  eaten  on  the  mountains,  or  Hfted  up  his  eyes 
to  the  idols  of  the  house  of  Israel,  or  defiled  his  neigh- 
bor's wife,"  etc.  This  chapter  is  noteworthy,  further, 
because  in  it  Ezekiel  adopts  the  individuahstic  stand- 
point of  Jeremiah.'  Indeed,  he  quotes  the  proverb  to 
which  his  predecessor  objected,  and  devotes  the  greater 
part  of  the  chapter  to  the  development  of  the  contrary 
doctrine.  He  starts  with  the  general  proposition,  put 
into  the  mouth  of  Yahweh,  "All  souls  are  mine;  as  the 
soul  of  the  father,  so  also  the  soul  of  the  son  is  mine." 
That  is,  every  human  being  has  an  immediate  relation 
to  his  Maker,  to  whom  he  is  directly  responsible  for 
his  personal  conduct,  and  by  whom  he  will  eventually 
be  rewarded  or  punished  according  to  his  deserts.  He 
declares  that  "the  soul  that  sinneth,  it  shall  die,"  but 
that  "the  just  man  shall  surely  live."  The  just  man 
is  described  in  terms  partly  positive  and  partly  negative. 
There  is,  first,  the  inclusive  positive  definition,  "just, 
and  doeth  justice  and  righteousness,"  then  a  series  of 
distinctions  which  may  be  arranged  in  a  decalogue,  as 
follows : 

1.  "Hath  not  eaten  on  the  mountains,  or  lifted  up 
his  eyes  to  the  idols  of  the  house  of  Israel." 

2.  "Hath  not  defiled  his  neighbor's  wife." 

3.  "Doth  not  come   near   to   a   woman    in    her 
impurity." 

4.  "Doth  not  oppress  any." 

5.  "Restoreth  to  the  debtor  his  pledge." 
^Jer.  31:29  f. 


220        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

6.  "Doth  not  take  aught  by  robbery." 

7.  "Giveth  his  bread  to  the  hungry,  and  covereth 
the  naked  with  a  garment." 

8.  ''Doth  not  lend  on  discount  or  take  interest." 

9.  "Withdraweth  his  hand  from  iniquity." 

10.  "Doeth  true  justice  between  man  and  man." 

Finally  the  various  items  are  summed  up  in  the 
general  requirement,  ''In  my  statutes  he  walketh,  and 
he  is  careful  to  do  my  judgments." 

This  is  the  just  man.  He  shall  live.  But  not  his 
son,  unless  he  follows  in  the  footsteps  of  his  father. 
Otherwise  he  must  surely  die.  On  the  other  hand,  if 
this  son  has  a  son  who  follows  the  example  of  his  grand- 
father, he  will  not  be  punished  for  the  sins  of  his  father, 
but  rewarded  according  to  his  righteousness  in  the 
sight  of  Yahweh.  In  fine,  "the  righteousness  of  the 
righteous,"  he  says,  "shall  be  upon  him,  and  the  wicked- 
ness of  the  wicked  shall  be  upon  him." 

There  seem  to  have  been  those  in  EzekieFs  day  who 
refused  to  accept  this  teaching,  claiming  that  it  argued 
instability  in  God,  so  mechanical  and  demoralizing  had 
become  their  idea .  of  •  the  doctrine  of  election.  The 
prophet  insists  that  it  is  required  by  the  very  nature  of 
Yahweh;  that,  being  himself  a  just  being,  he  cannot 
punish  a  good  man  or  reward  a  bad  one.  Indeed,  he 
goes  farther  and  applies  the  same  doctrine  to  the  same 
man  in  different  attitudes  to  the  divine  will  and  law. 
"If  the  wicked,"  says  Yahweh,  "turn  from  all  his  sins 
that  he  hath  committed,  and  keep  all  my  statutes, 
and  do  that  which  is  lawful  and  right,  he  shall  surely 
live.  None  of  his  transgressions  that  he  hath  com- 
mitted shall  be  remembered  against  him;  in  his  righteous- 
ness that  he  hath  wrought  he  shall  live.    Have  I  any 


EZEKIEL  AND  HIS  TIMES  221 

pleasure  in  the  death  of  the  wicked?  saith  the  Lord 
Yahweh,  and  not  rather  that  he  should  return  from  his 
way  and  live?  But,  when  the  righteous  turneth  away 
from  his  righteousness,  and  committeth  iniquity,  and 
doeth  according  to  all  the  abominations  that  the  wicked 
man  doeth,  shall  he  live  ?  None  of  his  righteous  deeds 
that  he  hath  done  shall  be  remembered;  in  his  trespass 
that  he  hath  trespassed,  and  in  his  sin  that  he  hath 
sinned,  in  them  shall  he  die."'  Thus  the  attitude  of 
God  to  every  man  at  any  given  moment  is  consistent 
with,  and  an  expression  of,  his  moral  character.  His 
way  is  always  "equal." 

These  words,  when  they  were  first  uttered,  gave 
offense;  but  there  came  a  time  when  the  Jews  in  cap- 
tivity began  to  realize  their  condition  and  "pine  away" 
in  their  sins.^  Then  the  prophet  repeated  them  in  a 
form  that  made  them  not  so  much  a  warning  as  an 
evangel  to  his  anxious  brethren. 

Attention  should  here  be  called  to  14:12  ff.,  where 
Ezekiel  combats  another  form  of  the  doctrine  of  vicarious 
righteousness.  In  this  passage  Yahweh  declares  that, 
if  a  land  sinned  against  him,  and  he  undertook,  by  any 
of  the  various  means  he  employs,  to  punish  it,  "although 
Noah,  Daniel,  and  Job  were  in  it,"  their  righteousness 
would  not  avail  to  protect  even  their  own  children; 
they  would  thereby  dehver  only  "their  own  souls."^ 

^  Ezek.  18: 21-24.  '  Ezek.  33: 10  ff. 

3  The  doctrine  here  taught  seems  to  be  contradicted  by  Ezek.  21:3, 
where  Yahweh  threatens  in  destroying  Jerusalem  to  cut  off  "the 
righteous  and  the  wicked."  The  fact  that  the  Greek  Version  reads 
"the  unjust  and  the  wicked"  suggests  that  the  text  is  corrupt,  but  it  is 
possible  that,  as  Kraetzschmar  explains,  the  passage,  being  an  early 
one,  reflects  a  temporary  mood  and  not  the  prophet's  settled  conviction. 


222        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

The  prophet  Ezekiel  has  less  to  say  than  some  of  the 
others  about  the  personal  habits  and  dispositions  of 
those  to  whom  he  addressed  himself.  He  refers  to  the 
"iniquity"  of  Sodom,  but,  strangely  enough,  specifies 
only  pride,  luxury,  security,  and  neglect  of  the  unfortu- 
nate.' The  positive  instruction  he  gives  is  confined 
to  44:21,  where  he  forbids  the  priests  to  drink  wine, 
"when  they  enter,"  that  is,  before  they  enter  "the 
inner  chamber,"  the  object  of  this  prohibition  evidently 
being  to  prevent  mistakes,  or  worse,  in  the  conduct  of 
the  ritual.     See  Lev.  10:9  f. 

In  the  same  connection  Ezekiel  restricts  the  priests 
in  the  matter  of  marriage.  One  of  their  number  may 
not  take  to  wife  the  widow  of  a  layman,  a  woman  who 
has  been  divorced,  or  a  foreigner;  but  must  take  a 
virgin  "of  the  seed  of  the  house  of  Israel,  or  a  widow 
that  is  the  widow  of  a  priest."^  The  prophet  evidently 
permitted  polygamy,  otherwise  he  would  not,  in  chap.  23, 
have  represented  Israel  and  Judah  figuratively  as  the 
wives  of  Yahweh.  The  fact  that  he  pictured  the  unfaith- 
fulness of  his  people  toward  Yahweh  as  adultery  shows 
what  he  thought  of  conjugal  infidelity.  He  includes 
it  in  his  indictment  of  the  princes  of  Judah,^  as  well  as 
in  the  decalogue  above  given.^  In  22 :  10  f .  he  mentions 
three  different  forms  of  incest  as  prevalent  in  his  day; 
also,  as  a  second  count,^  as  if  it  were  only  less  atrocious 
than  "the  shedding  of  blood,"  contempt  for  parents. 

The  schedules  just  cited  also  give  one  a  pretty  good 
idea  of  Ezekiel's  views  on  the  subject  of  social  ethics. 

'Ezek.  i6:49f.  ^Ezek.  44:22.  sEzek.  22:11. 

^Ezek.  18:6,  II,  15;  also  33:26. 
s  Ezek.  22:7. 


EZEKIEL  AND  HIS  TIMES  223 

Indeed,  there  is  no  more  complete  survey  of  the  duty 
of  man  to  man  outside  the  recognized  codes.  The 
prophet  naturally  lays  stress  upon  justice  in  general  as 
a  requirement  in  social  Hfe:  justice  in  the  conduct  of 
every  member  of  the  community  toward  every  other,' 
as  well  as  in  the  official  action  of  those  whose  duty  it  is 
to  settle  controversies  between  man  and  man.'  The 
contrary  practice  is  elsewhere  as  vigorously  condemned 
by  Ezekiel  as  by  any  of  his  predecessors  in  the  pro- 
phetical office.3  The  "ordinances''  of  Yahweh  are 
the  norm  in  accordance  with  which  justice  must  be 
administered.^ 

The  prophet  takes  repeated  occasion  throughout 
his  book  to  inculcate  respect  for  the  person,^  or  to  arraign 
his  people  or  their  rulers  for  the  contrary.  For  some 
time  before  the  overthrow  of  the  Jewish  monarchy  the 
country  was  in  a  condition  bordering  on  anarchy.  There 
was,  to  be  sure,  a  semblance  of  government,  but  the 
kings,  being  the  creatures  of  Egypt  or  Babylonia,  felt 
no  responsibility  to  or  for  their  subjects.  They  were 
therefore  cruel  and  arbitrary.  The  prophet,  in  chap.  34, 
compares  them  to  shepherds  who  look  only  after  their 
own  interests.  "Ye  eat  the  milk,"  he  says,  "and 
clothe  yourselves  with  the  wool,  and  kill  the  fatlings; 
but  ye  feed  not  the  sheep."  Their  example  was  natu- 
rally followed  by  their  underlings,  who  also,  in  their 
smaller  spheres,  ruled  "with  force  and  harshness."^ 
Finally  the  land  was  filled  with  violence,'  and  even  the 
sojourner,  the  widow,  and  the  orphan,  whose  weakness 

*  Ezek.  18:5.  ■♦  Ezek.  44 :  24.  ^  Ezek.  34 : 4. 

*Ezek.  18:8.  s Ezek.  18:7,  16,  18.  7  Ezek.  7:23;  8:17. 

3  Ezek.  9:9;  45:9. 


2  24        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

ought  to  have  been  their  protection,  were  oppressed 
without  mercy/  Nor  did  the  oppressors  stop  short  of 
bloodshed.  This  is  clear  from  22:25,  where  the  prophet 
charges  that  the  ^'leaders "^  in  Jerusalem  are  "like  a 
roaring  lion,  rending  prey:  they  have  devoured  souls; 
....  her  widows  have  they  multipHed  in  her  midst." 
See  also  vs.  27,  where  there  is  a  similar  charge  against 
the  "princes,"  who,  "like  wolves  rending  prey,  while 
they  pour  out  blood,  destroy  souls."  There  can  be 
little  doubt  that  in  both  of  these  passages  the  offense 
charged  is  nothing  short  of  wholesale  murder.  There 
are  several  other  passages  that  have  been  given  the 
same  interpretation,  because,  like  the  latter  of  the  two 
quoted,  they  contain  a  reference  to  bloodshed.  Thus, 
in  7:23,  where  the  prophet  declares  that  "the  land  is 
full  of  bloodshed,^  and  the  city  is  full  of  violence,"  he 
is  supposed  to  have  intended  to  accuse  his  people  of 
two  distinct  crimes,  murder  and  violence.  The  word 
"blood,"  however,  does  not  always  denote  or  imply 
death,  or  even  serious  physical  suffering,  from  violence. 
A  good  illustration  of  a  different,  but  perfectly  natural, 
usage  is  found  in  Isa.  1:15,  where  the  prophet  introduces 
an  exhortation  by  the  accusation,  "Your  hands  are  full 
of  blood."    The  meaning  of  the  word  "blood"  in  this 

^  Ezek.  22 : 7,  29. 

2  The  text  has  "prophets,"  but  it  is  better,  with  the  Greek  Version 
and  the  best  modern  authorities,  to  adopt  the  above  reading,  since 
otherwise  this  verse  would  anticipate  vs.  28,  where  the  prophets  come 
in  their  proper  order. 

3  The  text  has,  Uterally,  "judgment  of  blood,"  for  which  the  English 
Version  has  "bloody  crimes";  but  the  word  rendered  "judgment" 
is  evidently  a  copyist's  error  for  the  very  similar  one  meaning  "out- 
pouring," wrongly  translated  "oppression"  in  Isa.  5:7. 


EZEKIEL  AND  HIS  TIMES  225 

connection  appears  from  what  follows.  It  denotes  the 
guilt  incurred  by  the  evil  deeds  of  the  persons  addressed. 
But  these  deeds,  according  to  vs.  17,  must  have  been 
the  contraries  of  those  there  recommended,  namely, 
injustice,  oppression,  and  the  neglect  of  the  unfortunate. 
The  term  "bloodshed,"  therefore,  seems  to  have  been 
used  typically  for  any  or  all  of  the  more  serious  offenses, 
especially  of  men  against  men,  known  among  the  Hebrews, 
as  well  as  for  murder.  This  being  conceded,  it  at  once 
becomes  a  question  whether,  in  Ezek.  7:23,  one  should 
not  render  the  latter  half  of  the  verse,  "for  the  land  is 
full  of  crime  (blood),  and  the  city  is  full  of  violence." 
A  clearer  case  is  that  of  18:10  ff.,  where  the  hypo- 
thetical son  is  described,  literally,  vs.  10,  as  "violent" 
and  "a  shedder  of  blood,"  but  actual  bloodshed  is  not 
mentioned  among  the  offenses  by  which  he  is  represented 
as  justifying  this  characterization.' 

Among  the  other  passages  in  which  "bloodshed" 
has  a  typical  meaning  are  two,  22:2  ff.  and  24:6  ff.,  in 
which  Jerusalem  is  called  "the  city  of  blood,"*  that  is, 
the  city  guilty  of  the  most  grievous  offenses.  What 
these  offenses  were  may  be  learned  from  22:6  ff., 
where,  after  the  princes  have  been  described  as  shedding 
blood,  each  according  to  his  ability,  they  and  their 
people  are  accused  of  contempt  of  parents,  oppression 
of  the  unfortunate,  disregard  of  holy  rites  and  seasons, 
slander,  idolatry,  incest,  impurity,  adultery,  bribery, 

'  The  latter  half  of  vs.  10  being  a  gloss,  the  first  two  lines  of  the 
passage  may  be  translated. 

loa.  "  If  he  beget  a  violent,  lawless  son, 

iia.    Who  hath  not  done  any  of  these  things." 

»E.  v.,  "the  bloody  city." 


226        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

usury,  and  robbery.  In  the  cases  of  slander  and  bribery 
the  addition  of  the  final  clause,  "for  the  purpose  of 
shedding  blood,"  may  imply  a  conspiracy  against  the 
Hfe  of  a  third  party.  In  33:25  and  36:18  bloodshed 
probably  covers  all  forms  of  lawlessness,  as  distinguished 
from  idolatry,^  but  in  23:45,  since  the  offenders  are  the 
sisters  representing  Israel  and  Judah,  and  they  are  to 
be  arraigned  as  adulteresses,  it  must  be  interpreted  as 
including  disloyalty  to  Yahweh. 

In  the  number  of  the  offenses  of  which  the  princes  of 
Judah  were  accused  was  robbery.  There  is  none  that 
seems  to  have  been  more  prevalent  toward  the  close  of 
the  regal  period  in  Judah,  or  to  have  been  more  severely 
condemned  by  Ezekiel.*  It  is  one  of  the  marks  by 
which  he  distinguishes  the  wicked  from  the  righteous.^ 
No  one  who  has  been  guilty  of  it,  he  teaches,  can  ex- 
pect to  enjoy  the  favor  of  Yahweh  without  restoring  to 
its  rightful  owners  whatever  he  may  have  acquired 
by  injustice  or  violence. "»  The  leaders  were  the  chief 
offenders,  and  they  sometimes  put  people  out  of  the 
way  to  get  "dishonest  gain."^ 

The  practices  just  described  would  naturally  first 
attract  the  prophet's  attention,  but  he  did  not  over- 
look the  less  violent  methods  by  which  his  contem- 
poraries relieved  one  another  of  their  possessions.  He 
requires  of  the  princes  of  Israel,  not  only  that  they  "do 
away  with  violence  and  spoil,"  but  that  they  "have 

*  These  passages  are  both,  for  the  most  important  part,  wanting 
in  the  Greek  Version,  in  the  case  of  33:25  perhaps  through  the  over- 
sight of  a  copyist. 

«Ezek.  22:13,  29.  <Ezek.  33:15;  45:9. 

»Ezek.  18:12,  16,  18.  »Ezek.  22:25,  27. 


EZEKIEL  AND  HIS  TIMES  227 

just  balances,  and  a  just  ephah,  and  a  just  bath/'  and 
he  fixes  for  the  future  the  relation  of  the  common 
weights  and  measures  to  one  another.  See  45 : 9  £f . ; 
also  the  prophecy,  28:18,  in  which  he  threatens  Tyre 
with  destruction  on  account  of  the  dishonesty  of  her 
traffic. 

In  the  matter  of  loans  Ezekiel  marks  a  new  stage 
of  development.  The  Book  of  the  Covenant  simply 
forbade  the  oppression  of  the  poor  debtor.^  In  Deut. 
23 :  19  f .  the  Hebrews  are  permitted  to  take  a  discount 
from  foreigners,  but  not  from  one  another,  either  on 
money  or  produce.  The  prophet  makes  no  reference 
to  this  distinction,  but  it  is  possible  that  he  expected 
it  to  be  continued.  He  does,  however,  modify  the 
Deuteronomic  law  in  one  direction,  namely,  in  that  he 
forbids,  not  only  discounts,^  the  subtraction  of  a  certain 
part  or  percentage  in  advance  from  the  face  of  the  loan, 
but  "increase"  or  interest,  properly  so  called,  an  addi- 
tion for  the  use  of  the  same  to  the  amount  loaned. ^  It 
is  one  of  the  counts  in  his  indictment  against  "the 
bloody  city''  that  its  princes  and  others  have  "taken 
discount  and  interest"  from  their  neighbors.'* 

There  are  four  passages  in  which  pledges  for  debt 
find  mention.  In  three  of  these^  the  practice  of  requir- 
ing such  pledges  is  recognized;  also  the  proviso  made  in 
the  earliest  legislation,^  that  a  garment  must  be  restored 
to  its  owner  at  nightfall.      In  the  fourth^  the  just  man 

» Exod.  22:25.  The  last  clause  of  the  verse  is  a  Deuteronomic 
addition. 

»A.V.,  "usury";  R.V.,  "interest."         s  Ezek.  18:7,  12;  33:15. 

3  See  Ezek.  18:8,  13,  17.  ^  Exod.  22:26  f. 

4  Ezek.  22 : 2.  »  Ezek.  18: 16. 


228        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

is  described  as  one  who  ^'hath  not  taken  aught  to 
pledge,"  as  if  the  prophet  would  have  liked  to  aboUsh 
the  practice. 

The  reason  why  discount  and  interest  were  for- 
bidden among  the  Hebrews  is  that,  as  has  already- 
been  explained,  loans  were  generally  made  to  the  unfor- 
timate,  to  enable  them  to  meet  an  emergency,  and  were 
regarded  as  expressions  of  charity.  The  same  spirit 
prompted  those  who  had  possessions  to  give  of  their 
substance  to  those  who  were  in  want.  The  prophet 
commends  this  practice.'  He  evidently  regarded  it  as 
a  duty,  not  only  of  Jews,  but  of  universal  humanity. 
Hence  he  condemns  Sodom  because  "she  did  not 
strengthen  the  hand  of  the  poor  and  needy.  "^ 

Ezekiel  did  not  have  so  frequent  occasion  as  Jeremiah 
to  dwell  on  truthfulness  in  human  relations,  yet  there 
are  several  passages  in  which  he  shows  that  he  was 
anything  but  lax  in  the  matter.  He  also  knew  false 
prophets,  and  rebuked  them  as  sternly  as  his  predecessor. 
He  arraigns  them  in  22:28  among  the  classes  that  have 
incurred  the  wrath  of  Yahweh,  because  they  "white- 
wash" with  false  visions,  saying,  "Thus  saith  the  Lord 
Yahweh,  when  Yahweh  hath  not  spoken."  He  deals 
with  them  at  length  in  13: iff.  He  first  compares 
them  to  foxes,  because  they  do  not  build,  but  under- 
mine, by  encouraging  their  people  to  hope  when  there 
is  no  ground  for  encouragement.  In  vs.  10  he  introduces 
for  the  first  time  the  figure  to  which  there  was  a  reference 
in  the  passage  just  cited  from  chap.  22.  This  verse, 
in  the  Revised  Version,  reads,  "They  have  seduced 
my  people,  saying,  Peace,  and  there  is  no  peace:   and 

*  Ezek.  18:7,  16.  »  Ezek.  16:49. 


EZEKIEL  AND  HIS  TIMES  229 

when  one  buildeth  up  a  wall,  behold,  they  daub  it 
with  untempered  mortar'^:  a  translation  that  is  in 
more  than  one  respect  unsatisfactory.  In  the  first 
place,  it  is  ambiguous,  for,  although  it  is  clear  that 
the  seducers  are  the  false  prophets,  one  cannot  tell 
whether  the  builder  of  the  wall  is  Yahweh,  a  prophet, 
or  one  of  the  people.  In  point  of  fact  it  is  neither, 
but  the  people  as  a  whole,  and  the  wall  is  the  baseless 
plans  and  hopes  by  which  they  are  trying  to  fend  the 
fear  of  Nebuchadrezzar  and  his  army.  This  wall  the 
prophets  ''whitewash"  (R.V.,  margin),  which,  being 
interpreted,  means  that  they  mislead  the  people  and 
expose  them  to  additional  danger  by  encouraging  them 
in  their  dreams  of  deliverance  and  concealing  from  them 
the  insecurity  of  the  grounds  of  their  confidence. 
It  would  be  better,  therefore,  to  render  vss.  10-12  as 
follows:  "They  have  misled  my  people,  saying.  Peace, 
when  there  was  no  peace;  and,  when  these  built  a 
wall,  lo,  they  daubed  it  with  whitewash.  Say  to  those 
that  daub  with  whitewash,^  There  shall  be  a  flood  of 
rain,  and  hailstones  shall  fall,  and  a  storm-wind  shall 
break  loose;  and  lo,  when  the  wall  hath  fallen,  shall 
it  not  be  said  to  you.  Where  is  the  coating  wherewith 
ye  daubed  it  ?" 

Ezekiel  takes  occasion  to  testify  his  condemnation 
of  faithlessness  in  a  passage  on  the  revolt  of  the  Jews 
under  Zedekiah.  He  says^  that,  when  Nebuchadrezzar 
took  Jerusalem  the  first  time  and  replaced  Jehoiachin 
by  Zedekiah,  he  put  the  latter  under  oath,  his  object 

»The  clause  "and  (not  "that")  it  shall  fall,"  which  immediately 
follows,  is  a  gloss. 
'  Ezek.  17:135. 


230        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

being  "that  the  kingdom  might  be  humble,  ....  keep 
the  covenant  with  him,  and  so  endure";  but  that 
Zedekiah  soon  broke  his  oath  and  instituted  a  revolt 
by  sending  to  Egypt  for  men  and  horses.  The  prophet, 
making  no  account  of  the  circumstance  that  the  oath 
was  given  to  a  foreigner,  exclaims,  "Shall  he  prosper? 
shall  he  escape  that  doeth  these  things  ?  break  a  cove- 
nant and  escape!  ?"  Finally,  it  appears  that  the  reason 
why  he  is  so  indignant  is  that  an  oath  by  a  Hebrew  to 
whomsoever  given  is  an  appeal  to  Yahweh  and  the 
breaking  of  it  dishonors  him  as  the  national  Deity.' 

The  Book  of  Ezekiel  is  interesting  for  the  evidence 
it  presents  of  a  changed  attitude  toward  foreigners. 
In  early  times,  as  has  been  shown,  the  Hebrews  were 
very  hospitable  toward  the  peoples  that  dwelt  among 
or  about  them.  Witness  the  story  of  Judah  and  Tamar,^ 
the  adoption  of  the  Calebites,^  the  employment  by 
David  of  PhiHstines  and  other  foreigners,  especially 
about  his  own  person.^  These  foreign  guards  performed 
an  important  part  in  the  revolution  in  which  Athaliah 
was  deposed  and  Joash,  the  rightful  heir  to  the  throne, 
made  king.^  There  were  at  that  time  foreigners  serving 
in  the  temple,  as  the  Gibeonites  are  said  to  have  been 
condemned  to  do.^  It  was  perhaps  such  servants  who, 
according  to  I  Sam.  2:15,  waited  upon  the  officiating 
priests  in  Eli's  time  at  Shiloh.  They  were  called 
Nethinites  (given),  according  to  Ezra  8:20,  because 
"David  and  the  princes  had  given  them  for  the  service 
of  the  Levites."    Now,  Ezekiel  objected  to  the  employ- 

*  Ezek.  13:19;  Exod.  20:7.  ^I  Sam.  8:18;   15:18. 

»  Gen.,  chap.  38.  s  H  Kings  11:4  ff. 

»  Josh.  15 :  13  ff.  '  Josh.  9 :  27. 


EZEKIEL  AND  HIS  TIMES  231 

ment  of  foreigners  in  any  capacity  in  the  temple.  He 
reckoned  it  among  the  "abominations"  of  which  the 
house  of  Israel  had  been  guilty,  that  they  had  brought 
"foreigners,  uncircimicised  in  heart  and  uncircumcised 
in  flesh,"  into  the  sanctuary  "to  profane  it"  when  they 
offered  their  sacrifices  to  Yahweh.'  He  therefore 
represents  Yahweh  as  ordaining,  "No  foreigner,  uncir- 
cumcised in  heart  and  uncircumcised  in  flesh,  shall 
enter  my  sanctuary,  of  any  foreigners  that  are  among 
the  children  of  Israel."  Their  places  he  ingeniously 
proposes  to  supply  from  the  Levites  who  departed  from 
Yahweh  "when  Israel  went  astray,"  that  is,  from  the 
priests  of  the  local  sanctuaries  that  were  abohshed  by 
the  Deuteronomic  law.  The  Book  of  Deuteronomy 
itself  made  provision  for  them.  It  says:  "If  a  Levite 
come  from  any  of  thy  gates  out  of  all  Israel,  where  he 
sojoumeth,  and  come  with  all  the  desire  of  his  soul  to 
the  place  that  Yahweh  shall  choose;  then  he  shall 
minister  in  the  name  of  Yahweh  his  God,  as  all  his 
brethren  the  Levites  do,  who  stand  before  Yahweh."^ 
When,  however,  in  621  B.C.,  Josiah  introduced  his 
reforms,  although  the  priests  of  the  high  places  came  to 
Jerusalem,  and  "ate  bread  among  their  brethren," 
"they  came  not  up  to  the  altar  of  Yahweh."^  Ezekiel 
indorses  this  reservation.  Speaking  for  Yahweh,  he 
says:  "They  shall  not  come  near  to  me,  to  execute  the 
office  of  priest  to  me,  or  to  come  near  to  any  of  my  holy 
things,  and  to  the  things  that  are  most  holy;  but  they 
shall  bear  their  reproach  for  their  abominations  that 
they  have  committed.  Yet  will  I  make  them  keepers 
in  charge  of  the  house,  for  all  the  service  thereof  and 
'  Ezek.  44:6  ff.  '  Deut.  18:6  £.  J  n  Kings  23:9. 


232        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT  ' 

for  all  that  is  done  therein."'  This  proposal  was  made 
during  the  Exile.  It  could  not,  therefore,  at  once  be 
carried  into  effect.  In  point  of  fact,  it  was  never 
wholly  adopted;  for,  although  the  rest  of  the  priests 
were  degraded,  and  called  Levites  in  distinction  from 
the  sons  of  Zadokj^"  when  the  temple  was  rebuilt,  and 
worship  was  resimied  at  Jerusalem,  the  Nethinites 
returned  to  their  duties  at  the  sanctuary,  and  continued 
to  perform  these  duties  until  they  were  absorbed  by  the 
order  of  Levites.^ 

The  prophet,  strongly  as  he  objected  to  the  employ- 
ment of  foreigners  about  the  temple,  did  not  propose  to 
banish  the  sojourners  among  the  Jews  from  the  country. 
Indeed,  he  makes  more  hberal  provision  for  them  than 
any  of  his  predecessors.  In  47:21  ff.  he  directs  that, 
when  the  land  is  redivided,  the  sojourners  who  have 
lived  long  enough  among  the  Jews  to  beget  children — he 
seems  to  take  for  granted  that  they  will  be  circumcised — 
shall  be  "as  the  home-born  among  the  children  of 
Israel"  and  receive  their  portions,  each  in  the  tribe 
in  which  he  chances  to  sojourn. 

Ezekiel  devotes  several  chapters  in  different  parts 
of  his  book  to  foreign  peoples.  His  attitude  toward 
them  is  generally  hostile;  not,  however,  because  they 
are  ahens,  but  because  by  their  conduct  they  have 
given  him  and  his  people  cause  for  resentment.  Thus, 
in  25:1  ff.  he  condemns  the  Ammonites  because  "they 
said  Aha!"  that  is,  rejoiced,  "against  the  land  of  Israel, 
when  it  was  made  desolate,  and  against  the  house  of 
Judah,  when  they  went  into  captivity";    and  in  the 

•  Ezek.  44:13  f.  ^  Ezek.  44: 15  ff. 

3  Ezra  2:58;  Neh.  7:60;   io:28ff. 


EZEKIEL  AND  HIS  TIMES  233 

same  connection  he  brings  a  similar  charge  against 
Moab,  Edom,  Philistia,  and  Phoenicia/  Yahweh,  he 
declares,  has  decreed  their  humihation,  that  there  may 
be  '*no  more  for  the  house  of  Israel  a  pricking  brier  or 
a  hurting  thorn  among  all  about  them  that  treat  them 
despitefully."  See  also  35:1  ff.  In  chaps.  29-32  there 
is  a  succession  of  oracles  in  which  the  Egyptians  are 
threatened  with  invasion  and  subjugation  by  Nebuchad- 
rezzar, because,  according  to  29:6,  when  Jerusalem  was 
besieged,  the  Egyptians,  although  they  made  a  demon- 
stration against  the  Babylonians,  proved  but  "a  staff 
of  reed  to  the  house  of  Israel."  In  chaps.  38  f.  Gog 
represents  the  hostile  gentile  world,  by  the  destruction 
of  which,  the  prophet  teaches,  Yahweh  will  rescue  his 
people  and  vindicate  his  godhead  in  the  eyes  of  all 
mankind.* 

*  Ezek.  25:8,  12,  15;  26:2.  'Ezek.  38:19  ff. 


CHAPTER  XVIII 
THE  BOOK  OF  LAMENTATIONS 

This  little  book  is  traditionally  ascribed  to  Jeremiah. 
The  tradition  is  as  old  as  the  beginning  of  the  third 
century  before  the  Christian  era,  being  found  in  II 
Chron.  35:25.  When,  however,  one  studies  the  book 
carefully,  one  finds  that  it  cannot  be  attributed  to 
Jeremiah  or  any  other  single  writer.  That  the  prophet 
did  not  write  the  whole  of  it  is  clear  from  5:7.  In 
this  passage  the  author  complains, 

Our  fathers  sinned,  and  are  not,  ' 

And  we  have  borne  their  iniquities. 

But  Jeremiah  expressly  repudiates  such  teaching,  his  own 
being  that  ''every  one  shall  die  for  his  own  iniquity."^ 
If,  however,  as  is  claimed,  none  of  the  poems  of  which 
the  book  is  composed  can  be  dated  earher  than  Ezekiel, 
because  they  betray  his  influence,  they  were  probably 
all  written  before  the  end  of  the  Exile.  They  appear 
to  fit  this  period,  all  of  them.  Moreover,  they  all 
agree  in  one  feature  that  should  be  noted  in  this  con- 
nection, namely,  that  they  recognize  the  moral  character 
of  the  divine  government^  and  humbly  accept  the 
chastisement  inflicted  as  none  too  severe  in  view  of  the 
multitude  and  seriousness  of  the  offenses  of  which  the 
suffering  people  have  been  guilty.  See  Lam.  1:5; 
4:6;  5:16;  also  2:14  and  4:13,  where  the  priests  and 
the  prophets  receive  especial  mention  as  transgressors. 

»Jer.3i:29f.  =»  Lam.  1:18;  3:335. 

234 


THE  BOOK  OF  LAMENTATIONS  235 

In  so  far  as  the  instruments  that  Yahweh  has  chosen 
have  gone  beyond  his  instructions,  they  are  guilty  and 
must  in  their  turn  pay  the  penalty  of  their  presumption/ 
The  moral  tone  of  the  book  comes  out  most  strongly 
in  Lam.  4:22,  where  the  author  announces  to  Zion  the 
termination  of  her  suffering,  and  to  Edom  the  approach 
of  a  similar  visitation,  because  the  former  has  satisfied 
the  demands  of  the  divine  justice  while  the  latter  has 
not  yet  atoned  for  her  offenses.* 

'Lam.  1:22;  3:64^.;  4:22;  also  Isa.  10:5  £f. 
'Isa.  40:2. 


CHAPTER  XIX 

ISAIAH,  CHAPS.  40-55,  AND  RELATED  PROPHECIES 

The  doctrine  of  the  moral  character  of  the  divine 
government  was  prominent  in  the  Book  of  Lamenta- 
tions. It  is  more  noticeably  so  in  Isa.,  chaps.  40-55. 
There  is  not  so  much  stress  laid  upon  the  offenses  of 
the  Chosen  People  in  the  past.  Still  they  are  not 
forgotten.  Thus,  in  43:26  Yahweh  challenges  Israel: 
^'Put  me  in  remembrance;  let  us  implead  each  other. 
Set  forth  the  case  that  thou  mayst  be  justified."  Then, 
without  waiting  for  an  answer,  he  proceeds  with  the 
accusation:  ''Thy  first  father  (Jacob)  sinned,  and  thy 
teachers  have  transgressed  against  me There- 
fore I  gave  Jacob  to  the  ban,  and  Israel  to  revilings." 
The  same  thought  is  figuratively  expressed  in  50:1, 
"Lo^  for  your  iniquities  were  ye  sold,  and  for  your 
transgressions  was  your  mother  put  away."^  The 
great  prophet  of  the  Exile,  however,  claimed  that  these 
offenses  of  whatever  kind  and  degree  had  been  expiated 
by  the  sufferings  of  the  Jews  in  captivity.*  He  begins 
his  prophecies,  therefore,  with  the  announcement, 
''Speak  ye  comfortingly  to  Jerusalem,  and  cry  to  her 
that  her  service  is  fulfilled,  that  her  iniquity  is  pardoned; 
that  she  hath  received  from  Yahweh  double  for  all  her 
sins."^  This  does  not  mean  that  the  Jews  are  abso- 
lutely irreproachable,  but  that,  having  atoned  for  their 
past  misdeeds,  they  are,  relatively  to  other  peoples, 

^  See  also  Isa.  42 :  24a.  '  Isa.  40 : 2. 

'  Isa.  47 : 6. 

336 


ISA.,  CHAPS.  40-55,  AND  RELATED  PROPHECIES      237 

sufficiently  acceptable  to  Yahweh  to  warrant  him  in 
giving  them  a  new  trial;  and  it  is  from  this  point  of 
view  that  the  ethics  of  these  chapters  must  be  considered. 
The  author  teaches  that  justice  is  inherent  in  the 
divine  nature.  He  says  of  Yahweh  in  40:14,  *'With 
whom  took  he  counsel,  and  who  instructed  him,  and 
taught  him  the  path  of  justice  ?"  The  path  of  justice 
is  here  the  proper  treatment,  according  to  their  desert, 
of  men  and  nations,  and  the  teaching  is  that  Yahweh 
is  able  immediately  and  infallibly  to  discern  this  path. 
Yahweh  also,  according  to  45:19,  23,  speaks  ^'righteous- 
ness"  and  declares  'things  that  are  right."  Finally, 
his  righteous  nature  requires  him  to  follow  "the  path 
of  justice"  in  his  administration.  Hence  the  Servant, 
in  49:4,  in  spite  of  seeming  failure,  declares,  "Surely 
the  justice  due  me  is  with  Yahweh,  and  my  reward  with 
my  God";  and,  in  50:8,  "he  is  near  that  justifieth  me." 
It  is  only  when  men  are  bhnded  by  their  misfortunes 
that  they  are  tempted  to  say,  as  some  said  during  the 
Exile,  "My  way  is  hid  from  Yahweh,  and  the  justice 
due  me  is  passed  beyond  my  God."'  In  46:12  the 
term  used  is  not  "justice,"  but  "righteousness,"  which, 
in  these  chapters,  as  in  the  Psalms,  often  has  about  the 
sense  of  "deliverance,"  and  therefore  is  found  in  paral- 
lelism with  a  word  having  this  signification.  So  in 
45:21  ff.,  where  Yahweh  proclaims  himself  "a  righteous 
God  and  a  Savior,"  and  invites  "all  the  ends  of  the 
earth"  to  look  to  him  and  be  saved,  because  "only  in 
Yahweh  is  righteousness  and  strength,"  that  is,  dehver- 

*  Isa.  40:27;  see  also  46:12.  In  this  passage  the  original  reading, 
as  appears  from  the  Greek  Version,  was  not  ^b  *''Y^li5  "stout-hearted," 
but^b  ''nii5  "faint-hearted." 


238        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

ance  and  security;  also  in  51:1,  where  to  "follow  after 
righteousness"  is  equivalent  to  seeking  Yahweh  for 
deliverance. 

The  righteousness  of  Yahweh  reveals  itself  in  all 
his  ways.  It  was  "for  his  righteousness'  sake,"  to 
make  known  his  righteousness,  that  he  provided  the 
"great  and  glorious  law"  that  he  gave  to  his  people,' 
a  law  which,  according  to  snyf.,  should  teach  those 
who  know  it  that  the  righteousness  of  the  God  whom 
it  reveals  "shall  be  forever,"  and  his  salvation  "to  all 
generations."  The  power  by  which  he  enforces  his 
will  is  called  his  "righteous  right  hand,"^  while  the 
instruments  he  employs  he  summons  "in  righteousness" 
and  rewards  in  accordance  therewith.^  The  author  of 
these  chapters  beheved  that  not  only  the  Servant  of 
Yahweh,  but  also  Cyrus,  was  such  an  instrument.'' 
He  therefore  exhorted  his  brethren  in  captivity,  some 
of  whom  could  not  believe  that  Yahweh  would  intrust 
such  a  mission  to  a  gentile,^  to  prepare  for  their  release. 
"I  have  brought  near  my  righteousness,"  he  declares 
in  the  name  of  Yahweh,  "it  is  not  far  off,  and  my 
deliverance  shall  not  tarry;  yea,  I  will  grant  deliverance 
in  Zion  for  Israel  my  glory."^  See  also  51:5  f.,  where 
Yahweh  concludes  with  the  assurance,  "The  heavens 
may  vanish  like  smoke,  and  the  earth  wax  old  Hke  a 
garment,  while  they  that  dwell  thereon  die  like  gnats; 
but  my  deliverance  shall  be  for  ever,  and  my  righteous- 
ness shall  not  be  aboUshed."  In  45:8  there  is  a  twofold 
usage.     The   verse   reads,    "Distil,   ye   heavens,   from 

^Isa.  42:21.  •♦Isa.  42:6;  45:13. 

'  Isa.  41 :  10.  s  isa.  45 : 9  f . 

3lsa.  41:2;  49:4;  51:8.  ^  Isa.  46:13. 


ISA.,  CHAPS.  40-55,  AND  RELATED  PROPHECIES     239 

above,  and  let  the  clouds  drip  with  righteousness; 
let  the  earth  open,  and  be  fruitful  in  deliverance,  and 
let  it  send  forth  righteousness  also;  I,  Yahweh,  have 
created  it."  The  key  to  this  passage  seems  to  be 
found  in  55 :  10  f .,  where  the  word  of  Yahweh  is  compared 
to  the  faUing  rain  or  snow,  "that  watereth  the  earth, 
and  maketh  it  bring  forth  and  bud,  and  giveth  seed  to 
the  sower  and  bread  to  the  eater."  If  so,  righteousness 
in  the  first  instance  denotes  the  law  and  its  precepts, 
as  an  expression  of  the  divine  will  and  character,  and, 
in  the  second,  the  results  in  man  and  nature  of  con- 
formity to  that  law.  This  interpretation  is  confirmed 
by  54:14,  where  the  righteousness  in  which  the  Chosen 
People  are  to  be  established  is  explained  as  freedom 
from  oppression  and  anxiety.  "This,"  says  vs.  7, 
"is  the  heritage  of  the  servants  of  Yahweh,  and  their 
righteousness  from  me." 

The  ethical  character  of  Yahweh,  as  portrayed  in 
these  chapters,  and  of  his  relations  with  his  people,  is 
apparent.  There  are  only  two  or  three  passages  that 
produce  a  different  impression.  One  of  them  is  43:25, 
where  Yahweh  is  made  to  say,  "I,  even  I,  am  he  that 
blotteth  out  thy  transgressions  for  mine  own  sake,  and 
I  will  not  remember  thy  sins."  Here,  however,  the 
phrase  "for  mine  own  sake,"  according  to  Duhm  and 
others,  is  an  interpolation.  When  it  is  removed,  this 
passage,  like  44:22,  gives  no  reason  for  the  purpose 
expressed,  and  one  may  infer  from  vs.  28,  properly 
translated,  "Therefore  I  profaned,"  etc.,  that  it  was 
because  the  Jews  had  already  been  sufficiently  punished. 
It  remains  to  consider  48:9-11.  Here,  again,  any 
discrepancy  alleged  might  be  explained  by  adopting 


240        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

the  view  of  Duhm  and  others,  that  vss.  9  f .  are  an  inter- 
polation. The  next  might  then  be  rendered,  "For  mine 
own  sake,  for  mine  own  sake,  will  I  act,"  etc.,  the  act 
proposed  being  the  introduction  of  Cyrus.^  If  vss.  9  f. 
are  retained,  it  should  be  noted  that  in  vs.  10  Yahweh 
reminds  his  people  that  although  he  has  chosen  them, 
he  has  chosen  them  "in  the  furnace  of  affliction";  in 
other  words,  that  he  has  chosen  them  in  the  expectation 
that  they  will  profit  by  the  chastisement  to  which  they 
have  been  subjected  during  the  Exile. 

The  Exile  not  only  brought  the  Jews  to  realize  as- 
never  before  the  ethical  character  of  the  divine  govern- 
ment; it  also  gave  them  new  ideas  on  the  subject  of 
human  excellence.  In  early  times  David  was  their 
ideal,  other  and  later  men  being  measured  by  this  brave, 
impulsive,  resourceful,  and  masterful  warrior  and  ruler. 
During  the  Exile,  with  their  wonderful  ability  to  adapt 
themselves  to  existing  conditions,  they  abandoned  this 
ideal  and  chose  another  clothed  in  the  virtues  that 
bondage  and  suffering  had  developed  in  their  best  and 
noblest.  He  is  the  central  figure  of  Isa.,  chaps.  40-55, 
the  so-called  Servant  of  Yahweh.  He  is  described  in 
one  way  or  another  in  42:1-4;  49:1-7;  50:4-9;  and 
52:13 — 53:12.  In  the  first  of  these  passages  it  is  said 
of  him  that  "he  will  not  cry,  or  lift  up  his  voice,  or 
cause  it  to  be  heard  in  the  streets."^  And  in  the  second 
he  is  described  as  "a  servant  of  rulers";^  that  is,  he  is 
meek  or  humble.^  He  is  gentle,  also,  says  42:3,  and 
sympathetic.  "A  bruised  reed  will  he  not  break,  a 
dimly  burning  wick  will  he  not  quench."^    Further, 

Isa.  48:11  £E.  ^  Isa.  42:2.  » Isa.  49:7. 

*  See  also  Isa.  50:5.  s  See  also  Isa.  50:4;  53:9- 


ISA.,  CHAPS.  40-55,  AND  RELATED  PROPHECIES     241 

he  is  patient,  first  in  the  sense  of  being  constant.  "He 
will  not  fail  or  be  discouraged,"^  trusting  that,  however 
long  he  may  have  to  toil  and  wait,  Yahweh  will  finally 
grant  him  the  desire  of  his  heart.*  He  is  patient,  also, 
in  the  sense  that  he  accepts  a  cruel  lot  without  murmur- 
ing. "I  gave  my  back,"  he  says,  "to  the  smiters,  and 
my  cheeks  to  them  that  plucked  off  the  hair.  I  hid 
not  my  face  from  shame  and  spitting."^  This  feature 
is  especially  emphasized  in  53:3,  7,  10.  Finally  the 
labor  to  which  he  devotes  himself  he  does,  not  for  his 
own  advantage,  but  for  the  benefit  of  others,'*  and  the 
suffering  to  which  he  is  subjected  is  not  on  his  own 
account,  but  he  bears  the  griefs  and  carries  the  sorrows 
of  others,  and  he  is  bruised  for  their  iniquities,  that 
through  his  stripes  they  may  be  healed.^  He  is  himself 
assigned  a  portion  "with  the  great,"  not  because  he 
has  procured  for  himself  wealth  or  power  at  the  expense 
of  others,  but  because  "he  poured  out  himself"  in  the  ^ 
completest  self-sacrifice.^  Such  is  the  Servant  of 
Yahweh  of  Isa.,  chaps.  40-55.  In  55:3-5  the  great 
prophet  of  the  Exile  calls  upon  his  people  to  substitute 
this  new  ideal  for  the  future  David.  Speaking  for 
Yahweh,  he  says,  "I  will  make  an  everlasting  covenant  j 
with  you,  even  the  sure  mercies  of  David."  Then  he 
explains  what  he  means  by  the  "mercies  of  David":  \ 
"Lo,  I  gave  him  for  a  witness  to  the  peoples,  a  leader  ^ 
and  commander  to  the  peoples,"  and  adds,  "Lo,  thou 
shalt  call  a  nation  thou  knowest  not,  and  a  nation 
that  knew  not  thee  shall  run  unto  thee,"  thus  trans- 
ferring the  promise  made  to  David  to  the  nation  as 

^  Isa.  42:4.  3  Isa.  50:6.  sisa.  53:4£. 

'Isa.  49:4;  50:7.  <  Isa.  42:3  f.;  49:6.        ^  Isa.  53:12. 


242        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

the  servants  of  Yahweh  and  the  bearers  of  his  salvation 
to^he  world.  - 

The  last  sentence  suggests  a  third  respect  in  which 
the  Jews  greatly  changed  during  the  Exile,  namely,  in 
their  attitude  toward  foreigners.  They  had  previously 
been  in  close  contact  only  with  the  small  tribes  and 
peoples  in  and  about  Palestine,  some  of  which  they  had 
conquered  and  held  for  a  longer  or  shorter  time  in  sub- 
jection. While  they  remained  a  nation,  although  they 
no  longer  wielded  the  power  they  once  possessed,  they 
still  retained  their  national  pride  and  found  frequent 
occasion  to  show  their  contempt  for  their  neighbors. 
The  overthrow  of  the  house  of  David  and  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem  showed  them  not  only  their  weakness, 
but,  as  has  been  noted,  their  unworthiness  of  the  dis- 
tinction of  which  they  had  boasted.  Moreover,  it 
brought  those  who  were  carried  into  captivity  into 
intimate  relations  with  a  great  people  and  a  much  more 
complex  civilization  than  that  to  which  they  themselves 
had  attained.  Under  these  circumstances  the  more 
thoughtful  among  them  could  hardly  fail  to  realize 
that  they  were  but  a  small  fraction  of  the  world  of 
mankind,  and  that  it  was  impossible  for  their  God,  if 
1  he  was  indeed  the  true  God,  not  to  have  a  purpose  with 
/  reference  to  other  nations  larger  than  that  of  using 
cJ  them  to  chastise  his  chosen  people.  This  broader  view 
j  appears  in  Isa.,  chaps.  40-55.  Not  everywhere,  or 
always  in  the  same  breadth;  for  there  are  passages  that 
betray  more  or  less  narrowness  and  bitterness.  In  the 
first  place,  although  the  prophet  recognizes  the  hand  of 
Yahweh  in  the  banishment  of  his  people  from  their 
country,  he  cannot  altogether  acquit  the  Babylonians 


ISA.,  CHAPS.  40-55,  AND  RELATED  PROPHECIES  243 

of  guilt  in  the  matter.  This  is  the  way  in  which  he 
represents  Yahweh  as  arraigning  their  proud  city:  "I 
was  wroth  with  my  people,  I  profaned  my  inheritance, 
and  gave  them  into  thy  hand.  Thou  didst  show  them 
no  mercy.  Upon  the  aged  hast  thou  very  heavily  laid 
thy  yoke. "'  ^'  Therefore,"  he  says,  *'  shall  evil  come  upon 
thee;  thou  shalt  not  know  the  dawning  thereof:  and 
mischief  shall  fall  upon  thee;  thou  shalt  not  be  able  to 
put  it  away:  and  desolation  shall  come  upon  thee  sud- 
denly, which  thou  knowest  not."^  The  most  cruel  of 
these  passages  is  the  next  to  the  last,  where  Yahweh 
threatens  to  feed  the  Babylonian  oppressors  of  his  people 
with  their  own  flesh  and  blood. 

There  are  also  a  few  passages  in  which  the  writer 
in  one  way  or  another  represents  the  Jews  as  superior 
to  other  peoples.  Thus,  in  43:3  Yahweh  is  made  to 
say  that  he  will  give  Egypt,  Ethiopia,  and  Seba  to 
Cyrus  as  a  ransom  for  the  exiles,  while  in  45 :  14  f .  the 
same  nations  are  pictured  as  bringing  tribute  and  doing 
homage  to  the  Jews  as  the  people  of  the  only  true 
God.  The  same  thought  is  put  even  more  strongly  in 
49 :  22-24.  See  also  55:5.  These  passages  are  all  marred 
by  national  conceit.  At  his  best  the  prophet  rises  above 
such  limitations.  He  does  so  in  the  passages  in  which  he 
manifests  his  readiness  to  recognize  Cyrus  as  the  agent 
of  Yahweh.-  The  most  flattering  tefms^re  appIieH  to 
to  him.  He  is  "called,"  like  the  Servant.^  He  is 
"anointed"  of  Yahweh,'*  his  " shepherd, "^  and  Yahweh 

^Isa.  47:6. 

^Isa.  47:11.  See  also  Isa.  41:15  f.;  43:14;  45:14  f.;  48:14/.; 
49:245.;   51:9^- 

3lsa.4i:2;  42:6;  also  41:25;  45:3,13;  46:11. 
^Isa.  45:1.  s  Isa.  44:28. 


244        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

loves  him/  Some  of  the  prophet's  contemporaries,  as 
has  already  been  noted,  objected  to  the  use  of  such 
terms  of  a  gentile,  but  he  warns  them  not  to  presimie 
to  criticize  the  chosen  of  their  Maker.=*  The  same 
breadth  of  view  is  seen  in  51 14  f.,  where  Yahweh  makes 
the  announcement, /"  Instruction  shall  go  forth  from 
me,  and  my  decree^for  a  light  to  the  peoples."  The 
Servant  of  Yahweh  is  the  instrument  for  carrying  intQ_ 
effect  this  purpose.  In  42:1  £f.  it  is  declared  that  ^'he- 
will  bring  forth  justice  to  the  gentiles,"  "set  justice  in 
the  earth,"  and  himself  serve  as  "a  light  to  the  gentiles"; 
and  in  49 : 6  that  his  mission  is  to  "the  ends  of  the  earth." 
In  45:2off.  Yahweh  himself  summons  "the  remnant 
of  the  nations,"  proclaims  his  unique  Godhead,  and 
invites  them  to  share  his  salvation.  "Look  unto  me," 
he  pleads,  "and  be  ye  saved,  all  the  ends  of  the  earth; 
for  I  am  God,  and  there  is  none  else.  By  myself  have 
I  sworn,  the  word  hath  gone  forth  from  my  mouth  in 
righteousness,  and  shall  not  return,  that  to  me  every 
knee  shall  bow,  every  tongue  shall  swear."  On  this 
passage  Duhm  says,  "This  splendid  sentence  can  only 
be  the  expression  of  the  faith  of  the  Second  Isaiah  in 
the  unique  Godhead  of  Yahweh,  and  its  generous 
promise  of  the  spread  of  the  beneficent  rehgion  of 
Yahweh  over  the  whole  world  rises  far  above  the  selfish 
and  haughty  monotheism  of  the  later  Jews."  Yet  this 
chapter  is  not  so  remarkable  as  chap.  53,  if,  as  Marti 
and  others  hold,  the  speakers  in  vss.  i-ioa  are 
the  gentiles,  brought,  through  the  ministry  of  the 
Servant,  to  a  knowledge  of  Yahweh  and  the  essence 
of  true  religion. 

»Isa.  48:14.  »Isa.  45:9!. 


ISA.,  CHAPS.  40-55,  AND  RELATED  PROPHECIES     245 

It  is  not  possible,  even  with  the  help  of  Isa.,  chaps. 
40-55,  to  identify  all  the  passages,  large  and  small, 
that  were  added  to  the  earlier  prophetical  books  during 
the  Exile;  but  there  are  certain  prophecies  against 
Babylon  which  evidently  belong  to  this  period.  These 
are  Isa.,  chaps.  13  f.,  and  21 :  i-io,  and  Jer.,  chaps.  50  f., 
and  perhaps  parts  of  Isa.,  chap.  10.  They  are  all 
naturally  hostile,  as  the  two  chapters  from  Jeremiah 
would  not  have  been  had  they  been  written  by  the 
prophet  to  whom  they  are  attributed.  The  ethical 
note  is  constantly  emphasized.  The  great  offender  is, 
of  course,  Babylon,'  but  Israel  is  not  held  guiltless. 
This  is  strongly  put  in  Jer.  51:5,  which  should  be 
translated,  *' Israel  is  not  forsaken,  or  Judah,  of  his 
God,  Yahweh  of  Hosts,  but*  their  land  was  full  of  guilt 
against  the  Holy  One  of  Israel."  In  other  words, 
Yahweh  here  contends,  as  he  does  in  Isa.  50:  i,  that  it  is 
not  his  fault,  but  his  people's,  that  they  have  suffered. 
In  50:7  he  quotes  their  adversaries  as  defending  them- 
selves by  saying,  "We  are  not  guilty,  because  they  have 
sinned  against  Yahweh,  the  abode  of  righteousness,  the 
hope  of  their  fathers."^  Yahweh  himself  recognizes  the 
Babylonians  as  his  instruments.  Thus,  in  51:7  he  says, 
using  a  figure  first  found  in  25: 15  ff.,  "Babylon,  in  the 
hand  of  Yahweh,  hath  been  a  golden  cup  that  made  all 
the  earth  drunken."  In  51 :  20  ff.  he  uses  another  figure, 
"A  war-club  art  thou  to  me,  a  weapon  of  battle;  and 
with  thee  will  I  break  in  pieces  nations,  and  with  thee 
will  I  destroy  kingdoms,"  etc. 

^  In  Isa.,  chap.  10,  perhaps  under  the  disguise  of  Assyria. 
»E.V.,  "though." 
3  Cf.  Isa.  31:23. 


246        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

There  is  not  in  these  prophecies  any  distinct  state- 
ment to  the  effect  that  the  Babylonians  have  exceeded 
their  instructions,  but  it  seems  to  be  taken  for  granted. 
Hence  they  are  accused  of  various  forms  of  inhumanity. 
The  author  of  Isa.  14:17  says  they  "made  the  world  a 
desert  and  overthrew  its  cities,"  and  21:2  calls  them 
"destroyers."  One  of  their  greatest  crimes  was  the 
destruction  of  the  temple  at  Jerusalem.^  They  were 
oppressors,  too,  of  the  crudest  type.  They  "smote  the 
peoples  in  wrath  with  a  continual  smiting,"  and  "trod 
down  the  nations  in  anger  with  an  unsparing  trampling  "  f 
so  that  the  Jews  were  like  "the  3deld  of  the  threshing- 
floor."^  In  Isa.  21:2  the  Babylonians  are  accused  of 
dealing  treacherously  with  other  nations,  and  in  13:11 
they  are  reckoned  among  the  proud  and  haughty  of  the 
world,  and  threatened,  Uke  the  rest,  with  retribution. 
See  also  Jer.  50:56.  The  teaching  of  Jer.,  chaps.  50  f., 
is  that  their  time  has  already  come,"*  that  new  instru- 
ments of  Yahweh  have  been  commissioned  to  do  to 
them  as  they  have  done  to  their  victims.^  "As  Baby- 
lon," says  51:49,  "hath  caused  the  slain  of  Israel  to 
fall,  so  at  Babylon  shall  fall  the  slain  of  all  the  earth." 
Thus  will  Yahweh  avenge  the  destruction  of  his  temple,^ 
and  deUver  his  long  sujBfering  people.^  "In  those  days, 
and  in  that  time  ....  the  iniquity  of  Israel  shall  be 
sought  for,  and  there  shall  be  none;  and  the  sins  of 
Judah,  and  they  shall  not  be  found";  because  they  have 
all  been  forgiven.* 

» Jer.  so:  28;  51:11.  s  Jer.  50: 15,  29. 

»Isa.  14:6.  <^  Jer.  50:28;  51:11. 

3  Isa.  21 :  10;  also  Jer.  50:33.  ?  Jer.  51 :9  f. 

4  Jer.  51:6,  33.  » Jer.  50:20. 


ISA.,  CHAPS.  40-55,  AND  RELATED  PROPHECIES     247 

Thus  far  there  has  been  no  trace  of  sympathy  or 
fellowship  with  those  of  other  races.  Something  of  the 
sort  is  found  in  Isa.  14:1,  where  it  is  foretold  that, 
when  the  Jews  are  restored  to  their  own  country,  "  the 
sojourner  among  them  shall  join  himseK  with  them  and 
shall  cleave  to  the  house  of  Jacob."  This  passage, 
however,  according  to  Duhm  and  others,  is  post-exilic, 
and  therefore  need  not  be  considered  further  in  this 
connection. 

The  tone  and  spirit  of  these  prophecies  is  much 
like  those  of  the  later  Deuteronomic  Hterature,  and  per- 
haps for  the  reason  that  their  authors  also  were  scribes, 
and  not  genuine  prophets.  They  seem  to  gloat  over 
the  most  horrible  details.  Thus,  Isa.  13 : 7  f .,  describ- 
ing the  terror  produced  by  the  day  of  Yahweh,  says, 
"All  hands  shall  be  feeble,  and  every  human  heart  shall 
melt:  and  they  shall  be  dismayed;  pangs  and  sorrows 
shall  take  hold  of  them;  they  shall  be  in  pain  as  a  woman 
in  travail:  they  shall  look  in  amazement  one  at  another; 
their  faces  shall  be  faces  of  flame. "^  The  cruelty  of  the 
invaders  is  thus  described  in  Isa.  13:15  f.:  "Every  one 
that  is  found  shall  be  thrust  through;  and  every  one 
that  is  caught  shall  fall  by  the  sword.  Their  infants  also 
shall  be  dashed  in  pieces  before  their  eyes;  their  houses 
shall  be  rifled,  and  their  wives  ravished."^  The  deso- 
lation wrought  is  compared  to  that  "when  God  destroyed 
Sodom  and  Gomorrah,"^  and  further  described  with  the 
most  gloomy  and  dreadful  details.''  In  Isa.  2i:3f. 
the  writer  professes  anguish  at  the  vision  revealed,  but 
this  is  no  doubt  a  literary  artifice  to  heighten  the  interest 

^  See  also  Jer.  51:3!.  ^  isa.  13 :  19. 

"  See  also  Jer.  50 1352.  4  See  also  Jer.  50 :  39  f . 


248        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

of  the  reader.  He  cannot  have  seen  or  imagined  any- 
thing more  revolting  than  some  of  the  cruelties  described 
in  the  passages  quoted.  Cf.  Isa.,  chap.  47,  and  the 
reserve  with  which  its  author  treats  the  same  subject. 


CHAPTER  XX 

HAGGAI  AND  ZECHARIAH,  AND  THEIR  TIMES 

A  few  years  after  the  conquest  of  Babylonia  by 
Cyrus — ^in  520  B.C.,  to  be  exact — there  arose  in  Judea 
two  prophets  who  worked  together  for  the  restoration 
of  the  Jewish  community,  and  especially  for  the  re- 
establishment  of  the  worship  of  Yahweh  at  Jerusalem. 

I.      HAGGAI 

Haggai,  who  seems  to  have  been  the  elder,  began  the 
agitation  for  a  new  temple,  and  persevered  until  he 
persuaded  Zerubbabel  the  governor  and  Joshua  the 
high  priest,  and  finally  the  people,  to  undertake  the 
work.  He  kept  them  to  their  task  by  picturing  to  them 
the  wealth  and  honor  he  saw  in  store  for  the  new  sanc- 
tuary. He  predicted  that  its  glory  would  be  even 
greater  than  that  of  the  famous  temple  built  by  Solomon. 

It  was  in  connection  with  this  thought  that  Haggai 
made  a  prediction  which  should  not  be  overlooked. 
In  the  Authorized  Version  it  is  rendered,  "I  will  shake 
all  nations,  and  the  desire  of  all  nations  shall  come; 
and  I  will  fill  this  house  with  glory,  saith  the  Lord  of 
hosts";'  and  the  whole  has  been  interpreted  as  a 
prophecy  concerning  the  Messiah.  This  interpretation, 
however,  has  now  been  pretty  generally  abandoned, 
since  it  is  clear  to  anyone  familiar  with  Hebrew  that  the 
word  translated  "desire,"  and  often  written  "Desire," 
is  plural,  and  that  therefore  the  prophet  must  have  had 

'  Hag.  2 : 7. 

249 


250        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

in  mind,  not  a  person  on  whom  the  nations  had  fixed 
their  expectations,  but  the  desirable  things  in  which 
the  riches  of  the  peoples  of  his  time  consisted.  When, 
however,  he  says  that  these  things  will  come,  he  means 
that  those  to  whom  they  belong  will  bring  them  as 
presents;  in  other  words,  that  the  new  temple  will  be 
enriched  by  pilgrims  from  foreign  nations  who  will 
come  thither  to  worship  Yahweh.  This  prediction 
betrays  the  influence  of  the  Second  Isaiah.  It  does  not, 
however,  present  the  worthier  side  of  universalism. 
Haggai  was  evidently  a  practical  man,  and  had  to  deal 
with  a  generation  struggling  against  material  obstacles 
for  physical  existence,  and  he  doubtless  pictured  the 
future  of  the  house  he  wished  to  build  in  the  way  that 
would  appeal  to  them  most  strongly.  The  fact  that 
he  succeeded — ^for  the  house  '^was  finished  on  the  third 
day  of  the  month  Adar,  which  was  in  the  sixth  year  of 
Darius  the  king"^ — shows  that  the  Jews  of  his  day  were 
by  no  means  averse  to  the  admission  of  foreigners  to 
the  privileges  and  benefits  of  their  religion. 

2.      ZECHARIAH 

In  the  same  year,  520  B.C.,  and  only  two  months 
after  Haggai,  Zechariah  gave  utterance  to  the  first  of 
the  prophecies  attributed  to  him.  He  also  was  interested 
in  the  new  temple,  but  he  did  not  confine  himself  to  that 
project.  Consequently,  in  the  eight  chapters  of  his 
genuine  prophecies — chaps.  9-14  of  the  book  that  bears 
his  name  being  by  other  and  later  authors — there  is 
considerable  material  for  an  estimate  of  his  ethical 
position.     Indeed,  of  all  the  later  prophets  he  is  the 

'Ezra  6:15. 


HAGGAI  AND  ZECHARIAH,  AND  THEIR  TIMES    251 

one  whose  teaching  in  this  respect  most  nearly  resembles 
that  of  the  great  "former  prophets,"  to  whom  he  more 
than  once  refers/ 

This  prophet  confines  himself  entirely  to  social 
ethics.  He  evidently  beheved  that  all  necessary 
instruction  on  the  subject  was  contained  in  the  "words" 
and  "statutes"  that  Yahweh  had  directed  his  servants 
the  prophets  to  deHver  to  his  people.^  In  Zech.  7 : 9  f . 
he  is  specific  with  reference  to  the  instruction  thus  given. 
It  required,  first  of  all,  "true  justice,"  absolute  and 
invariable  impartiaUty  between  man  and  man,  without 
which  society  is  always  in  a  state  of  unstable  equilibriimi. 
It  went  farther  and  inculcated  the  principle  that  every 
man  show  "kindness  and  compassion"  toward  his 
neighbor,  thus  fusing  the  members  of  the  community 
together  in  spite  of  their  individual  interests.  The 
widow,  the  orphan,  the  sojourner,  and  the  needy,  he 
says — and  the  most  casual  reader  of  the  earlier  prophets 
cannot  but  have  noted  the  fact — ^were  especially  com- 
mended to  the  s)mipathy  of  their  more  fortunate  fellows. 
Finally,  he  names  a  third  requirement  which,  in  its 
searching  character,  reminds  one  of  the  last  command- 
ment of  the  Decalogue,  namely,  "Let  none  of  you 
devise  evil  against  his  brother  in  his  heart."  This  is 
the  Golden  Rule,  negatively  stated,  and,  as  such,  the 
fundamental  demand  of  social  morahty.  The  three 
requirements,  in  themselves  considered,  are  a  remark- 
able epitome  of  social  ethics.  They  acquire  additional 
significance  when  one  considers  the  setting  in  which 
they  are  found.  The  people  of  Bethel,  it  appears,  had 
sent  a  delegation  to  Jerusalem  to  inquire  of  the  priests 

'Zech.  1:4;  7:7,12.  'Zech.  1:6. 


252        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

whether,  now  that  the  Exile  was  ended,  they  should 
longer  "weep  in  the  fifth  month,'"  that  is,  observe  the 
fast  commemorating  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  the 
Babylonians.  The  prophets,  too,  according  to  the 
present  text,  were  consulted.  At  any  rate,  Zechariah, 
following  the  example  of  his  predecessors,  took  occasion 
from  the  incident  to  revive  the  teaching  of  Amos, 
Isaiah,  and  Jeremiah  on  the  relative  value  of  ceremonial 
observances.  He  makes  Yahweh  say  distinctly  that 
the  fasts  observed  during  the  Exile  had  no  religious 
value,  being  as  selfishly  personal  as  were  the  feasts  at 
which  they  gorged  themselves.*  Then  he  introduces 
his  resume  of  the  teaching  of  "the  former  prophets."^ 
It  is  clear  that,  with  Micah,  he  intended  to  teach  that 
the  observance  of  these  precepts,  as  representing  the 
will  of  Yahweh,  was  true  religion  as  well  as  genuine 
morality.^  "Therefore,"  when  the  fathers  persistently 
neglected  them,  he  says,  "there  came  great  wrath" 
upon  them  "from  Yahweh  of  Hosts."^ 

The  quotations  already  made  indicate  clearly  enough 
Zechariah's  general  position.  There  are  other  passages 
by  which  it  is  more  closely  defined.  In  the  first  place, 
there  is  his  vision  of  the  flying  roU.^  In  this  vision  the 
prophet  sees  a  roll  passing  through  the  air  and  carrying 
a  curse  over  the  face  of  the  whole  land.  He  learns  that 
it  is  for  the  thief  and  the  perjurer.  Now,  the  prophet 
cannot  have  intended  to  give  the  reader  to  understand 
that  there  were  only  these  two  classes  of  offenders 
against  morality  among  his  people.  They  are  merely 
representative;  but  they  would  not  have  been  specified, 

^  Zech.  7:2  f.      3  Zech.  7:9  f.      s  Zech.  7:12. 

'  Zech.  7:5  f.      ■♦  Mic.  6:8.        <*  See  Zech.  5 :  i  ff. 


HAGGAI  AND  ZECHARIAH,  AND  THEIR  TIMES     253 

if  stealing  and  false  swearing  had  not  been  common  in 
the  prophet's  day.  That  the  latter  was  prevalent  is 
further  evident  by  the  fact  that  in  8:17  he  exhorts  his 
people  to  "love  no  false  oath."  The  vision  as  a  whole 
signifies  the  banishment  of  offenses  of  every  kind 
against  religion  and  morality  from  the  restored  Jewish 
community.' 

There  are  two  virtues  that  Zechariah  emphasizes  in 
his  eighth  and  last  chapter.  The  whole  chapter,  by  the 
way,  although  it  was  doubtless  written  by  Zechariah, 
has  a  more  subdued  tone  than  the  other  seven.  The 
explanation  of  this  fact  is  doubtless  to  be  found  in  the 
political  history  of  the  times.  Haggai,  it  will  be  remem- 
bered, closed  his  book  with  a  very  enthusiastic  indorse- 
ment of  Zerubbabel  as  the  heir  to  the  promises  made 
to  David.  It  runs,  "In  that  day,  saith  Yahweh  of 
Hosts,  will  I  take  thee,  Zerubbabel,  son  of  Shealtiel, 
and  I  will  make  thee  as  a  signet;  for  I  have  chosen 
thee,  saith  Yahweh."  Zechariah  at  first  followed 
Haggai.  In  the  vision  of  the  lamp*  he  is  one  of 
"the  two  anointed  ones  that  stand  by  the  Lord  of  the 
whole  earth."  He  is  the  Branch  of  3:8  and  6:12  i., 
of  whom  the  prophet  says  in  the  latter  passage,  as 
originally  written,  "He  shall  build  the  temple  of  Yahweh; 
and  he  shall  receive  majesty,  and  sit  and  rule  on  his 
throne;  and  there  shall  be  a  priest  (Joshua)  on  his  right 
hand,  and  there  shall  be  peaceful  counsel  between 
the  two."    Now,  it  is  probable  that,  while  Darius  the 

^The  next  vision,  that  of  the  woman  named  "Wickedness,"  at 
first  sight  seems  to  contradict  this  interpretation;  but  there  is  no  con- 
flict if,  as  is  probably  the  case,  wickedness  there  denotes  idolatry. 

»Zech.  4:iff. 


254        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

king  of  Persia  was  engaged  in  subduing  the  provinces 
that  revolted  on  the  death  of  his  predecessor  Cambyses, 
he  gave  Httle  heed  to  the  pretensions  of  the  Jewish 
prince,  but  that,  when  his  hands  were  free,  he  in  some 
way  checked  the  movement  for  independence.  The 
eighth  chapter  sounds  as  if  its  author  had  awoke  as 
from  a  dream,  and  seen  that  the  mission  of  his  people 
could  best  be  fulfilled,  not  under  the  leadership  of  a  petty 
prince  of  his  own  race,  but  under  the  protection  of  the 
king  of  Persia.  He  therefore  has  nothing  further  to  say 
about  Zerubbabel,  but  pictures  a  quiet  and  prosperity  for 
which  there  was  no  warrant  except  in  dependence  on  the 
dominant  oriental  power.  The  advice  he  has  to  o£fer 
harmonizes  with  such  an  attitude.  He  insists,  as  did 
"the  former  prophets,"  on  the  practice  of  justice;  but  he 
characterizes  the  thing  required  as  "peaceful  justice,'^* 
a  justice  that  leaves  both  parties  without  an  excuse  for 
further  contention,  and  repeats — how  could  he  have 
omitted  it? — the  injunction  of  7:10,  "Let  none  of  you 
devise  evil  in  his  heart  against  his  neighbor."^  The 
rule  forbidding  the  neglect  of  the  unfortunate  is  omitted, 
but  it  is  practically  involved  in  those  already  cited. 
In  its  stead  there  are  two  on  the  subject  of  rehabiUty. 
In  one  of  them  Yahweh  commands  that  every  man 
"speak  truth  with  his  neighbor."  This  seemed  to 
Zechariah  of  so  great  importance  that  he  placed  it  first 
in  his  list,  adding  at  the  end  the  related  injunction, 
already  quoted,  "Love  no  false  oath."  Now,  it  is 
possible  that  the  prophet,  when  he  wrote  these  words,  did 

*  Zech.  8:16.  The  original  has  "truth  and  peaceful  justice,"  but  the 
first  word  is  a  gloss.     For  "peaceful"  some  read  "perfect." 
'Zech.  8:16  f. 


HAGGAI  AND  ZECHARIAH,  AND  THEIR  TIMES     255 

not  have  any  thought  of  the  relation  betv/een  Judah 
and  Persia ;  but  he  must  have  known  that  the  overthrow 
of  the  Davidic  dynasty  was  occasioned  by  the  faithless- 
ness of  Zedekiah,'  and  he  would  certainly  have  said 
that  the  relation  to  Persia  which  the  Jews  were  obliged 
to  accept  when  Zerubbabel  was  ehminated  furnished  a 
case  in  point.  When,  therefore,  he  predicted  that 
Jerusalem  would  one  day  be  famed  as  "The  city  of 
truth, "="  that  is,  the  faithful  city,  he  may  well  have 
included  in  the  virtues  of  its  citizens  loyalty  to  the 
Great  King.^ 

There  is  another  touch  that  harmonizes  with  the 
spirit  of  submission  displayed  in  these  last  two  chapters. 
It  has  already  been  noted  that  the  justice  recommended 
by  Zechariah  is  described  as  "peaceful."  The  intro- 
duction of  this  modifier  indicates  only  less  clearly  than 
does  the  picture  of  the  old  men  and  women  sitting  in 
the  streets,  with  troops  of  boys  and  girls  playing  about 
them,4  how  highly  the  prophet  valued  the  security  that 
the  triumph  of  Darius  brought  to  all  parts  of  his  immense 
empire.  It  is  not  strange,  therefore,  that,  in  8:19,  his 
final  injunction  is,  "Love  truth  (faithfulness)  and  peace," 
that  is.  Be  loyal  to  Yahweh  and  all  your  divinely 
ordained  relations,  for  the  sake  of  peace  and  its  attendant 
prosperity. 

In  view  of  what  has  been  said  it  is  not  difficult 
to  imagine  the  attitude  that  Zechariah  took  with 
reference  to  foreigners  in  general;  yet  some  explanation 
is  necessary.  This  is  due  to  the  fact  that,  in  his  first 
two  visions,  the  prophet  is  dealing,  not  with  the  future, 

^Ezek.  17:11  ff.  3  Isa.  1:21,  26. 

«Zech.  8:3.  '♦Zech.  8:4!. 


256        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

but  with  the  past,  and  borrowing  from  "the  former 
prophets."  Thus  in  1:15  he  represents  Yahweh  as 
"sorely  displeased  with  the  nations,"  because,  when  he 
was  only  "a  little  displeased"  with  his  people,  "they 
helped  forward  the  aflfliction."  This  is  the  idea  of 
Isa.  10:6  f.  and  40:2.  See  also  the  "smiths"  of  1:21. 
In  both  of  these  passages  it  is  Babylonia,  and  not  Persia, 
that  is  the  offender,  just  as  in  2 : 7  it  is  Babylonia  from 
which  the  Jews  are  simimoned  to  escape.  The  prophet 
feels  the  same  resentment  toward  this  power  that  those 
before  him  expressed,  and  dooms  to  overthrow  all  the 
nations  that  attempt  to  plunder  his  people;  but  he  looks 
for  a  time  when  the  nations,  having  ceased  from  their 
rapacity,  will  not  only  make  pilgrimages  and  bring 
offerings  to  Jerusalem,  as  Haggai  predicted,  but  will 
"join  themselves  to  Yahweh"  and  be  incorporated  with 
his  people.  The  same  thought  is  expressed  in  a  different 
way  at  the  very  close  of  Zechariah's  book,'  where  he 
predicts  that  the  days  will  come  when  "ten  men  will 
take  hold  of  the  skirt  of  him  that  is  a  Jew,  saying.  We 
will  go  with  you,  for  we  have  heard  that  God  is  with 
you."  The  recognition  of  the  brotherhood  of  mankind  in 
these  two  passages  is  all  but  complete,  but,  in  the  first, 
as  in  Mic.  4: iff.,*  Jerusalem  remains  the  religious 
center  of  the  world,  and  in  the  second  the  Jew  retains 
the  pre-eminence. 

*  Zech.  8:22.  Isa.  2 : 2  ff. 


CHAPTER  XXI 
THE  PRIESTLY  NARRATIVE 

The  attitude  of  the  Hebrews  with  reference  to  the 
records  of  their  past  has  already  been  considered.  It 
appeared  in  the  Ephraimite  narrative,  which  proved 
to  be  a  version  of  their  history  written  from  a  more 
advanced  ethical  standpoint  than  the  Judean,  probably 
with  the  idea  of  making  it  a  more  valuable  means  of 
instruction  in  morals  and  religion.  In  like  manner, 
after  the  destruction  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  they 
revamped  the  code  of  laws  that  had  served  them  until 
that  time  and  adapted  it  to  the  new  demand  for  the 
centrahzation  of  the  worship  of  Yahweh  at  Jerusalem. 
There  came  a  time  when  these  later  works  also  failed -to 
satisfy  some,  at  least,  of  the  Jews  of  the  period,  especially 
the  priests.  It  was  among  these  last  that  there  finally 
originated  a  new  and  carefully  pruned  outHne  of  the 
history  from  Creation  to  the  Exodus,  with  a  fuller 
account  of  the  latter  and  the  invasion  of  Canaan,  into 
which  was  wrought  a  mass  of  legislation  consisting  in 
part  of  laws,  more  or  less  modified,  from  the  earher 
codes,  but  more  largely  of  new  ones,  that  is,  laws  not 
previously  presented  in  such  a  historical  setting,  bearing 
on  the  Hebrew  cultus.  This  work,  commonly  called  the 
Priestly  narrative  (P),  or  the  Priests'  Code  (PC),  must 
be  studied  in  the  Hght  of  its  origin.  It  may  contain 
valuable  information  concerning  the  ethical  develop- 
ment of  the  Hebrews  for  the  period  which  it  covers,  but, 
from  the  nature  of  the  case,  it  will  be  of  far  more  value 

257 


258        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

for  the  one  in  which  it  was  compiled.  It  cannot  be 
regarded  as,  in  the  modern  sense,  a  historical  work, 
since  it  is  perfectly  evident  that  the  material  at  the 
disposal  of  its  author  or  authors  has  been  handled  with 
the  utmost  freedom,  much  that  was  valuable  having 
been  discarded  because  it  did  not  suit  the  plan  or  the 
views  that  had  been  adopted,  and  the  rest  arranged 
without  much  regard  to  its  actual  origin  in  a  chrono- 
logical framework  that  appears  to  be  entirely  artificial. 
Nevertheless  the  work  has  ethical  significance.  Indeed, 
one  must  admit  that  it  reflects  a  development  in  some 
respects  more  advanced  than  either  of  the  other 
narratives. 

The  ethical  character  of  this  narrative  appears  in 
its  outline  of  the  earliest  period;  and  first,  in  its  omis- 
sions, such  as  the  story  of  the  sons  of  God,''  and  that  of 
the  drunkenness  of  Noah,*  both  of  which  were  doubtless 
expunged  because  they  were  regarded  as  immoral. 
There  are  other  similar  indications.  One  of  them  is 
found  in  the  genealogy  of  Gen.,  chap.  5,  in  its  original 
form,  as  preserved  in  the  Samaritan  text,  in  which  the 
figures  decrease  with  greater  regularity  than  in  the 
Massoretic,  and  according  to  which,  not  one  (Methu- 
selah), but  three  (Jered,  Methuselah,  and  Lemech) 
of  the  antediluvian  patriarchs  perished  in  the  Deluge: 
so  that  the  gradual  deterioration  of  the  race  and  its 
summary  destruction  is  taught  by  these  figures  as  well 
as  in  the  Priestly  story  of  the  Flood,  where  the  only 
offense  mentioned  is  violence.^ 

The  Priestly  account  of  the  patriarchal  period,  so 
far  as  it  has  been  preserved,  is  almost  entirely  without 

'Gen.  6:  iff.  » Gen.  9:20  ff.  »  Gen.  6:11,  13. 


THE  PRIESTLY  NARRATIVE  259 

positive  ethical  material.  The  incidents  that  give  to 
the  Judean  narrative  its  interest  and  importance,  and 
which,  as  modified  by  the  Ephraimite  narrator,  furnish 
a  measure  of  the  progress  made  from  850  to  750  B.C., 
are  either  entirely  omitted  or  reduced  to  insignificance. 
Thus,  there  is  no  reference  to  Abraham's  (or  Isaac's) 
attempt  to  protect  himself  at  the  risk  of  his  wife's 
honor,  since  to  a  late  priest  marriage  to  a  half-sister 
was  more  abominable  than  outright  falsehood.^  The 
reason  given  for  the  separation  between  Abraham  and 
Lot  is  not  that  their  herdsmen  quarreled,  but  that 
"the  land  was  not  able  to  bear  them."^  The  Priestly 
version  of  the  story  of  Hagar  ignores  the  trouble  between 
her  and  her  mistress  and  represents  Ishmael  as  growing 
to  manhood  in  his  father's  family  on  the  best  terms  with 
his  half-brother.3  The  falsehood  told  by  Sarah,  when 
the  angel  accused  her  of  laughing,  is  suppressed,  as 
also  the  treachery  by  which  Jacob  robbed  Esau  of  his 
birthright  and  Laban  of  his  property,  and  the  quarrels 
that  resulted.  Thus  the  patriarchs  are  stripped  of  their 
individuaHty  and  become  little  more  than  so  many 
names  in  a  genealogy;  but  the  suppression  of  these 
distinctive  incidents  in  itself  shows  that  the  author 
condemned  lying  and  cheating  and  that  he  had  the 
support  of  the  decent  people  of  his  day  in  so  doing. 
On  the  other  hand,  when  he  wrote,  there  was  no  sen- 
timent against  polygamy,  concubinage,  or  slavery. 
Consequently  he  does  not  attempt  to  conceal  or  excuse 
the  fact  that,  according  to  tradition,  Jacob,  as  well  as 
Esau,  was  a  polygamist,'*  and  that  Sarah,  Leah,  and 

*Lev.  20:1;  Deut.  27:22.  3  Gen.  17:20;  25:9. 

'Gen.  13:6.  •♦Gen.  35:23  ff.;  26:34;  28:9. 


26o        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

Rachel  all  had  slaves  whom  they  gave  to  their  respective 
husbands  as  concubines.' 

This  is  all  that  can  be  said  to  any  purpose  on  the 
patriarchal  period,  as  outlined  by  the  Priestly  narrator. 
When,  however,  one  consults  him  on  the  period  of  the 
Exodus,  one  is  overwhelmed  with  the  abundance  of  the 
material  he  has  to  offer.  Most  of  it  is  contained  in  the 
so-called  Law  of  Holiness,  Lev.,  chaps.  17-26,  where 
many  of  the  laws  of  the  Ephraimite  and  Deuteronomic 
codes  are  reproduced,  sometimes  without  change,  but 
sometimes,  also,  with  important  modifications.  This 
Priestly  legislation  must  now  be  examined  and  its 
ethical  significance  duly  considered. 

When  the  legislation  of  the  Priests'  Code  is  compared 
with  the  previous  attempts  to  regulate  the  morals  of 
the  Hebrews  many  differences  present  themselves. 

The  prohibition  of  intercourse  with  a  woman  during 
menstruation,  which  appears  first  in  Lev.  18:19  and 
20:18,  but  must  be  older  than  500  B.C.,  was  doubtless 
prompted  in  great  measure  by  superstition,  but  the 
effect  would  be  to  check  unbridled  sensuality.^ 

There  is  no  general  restriction  on  the  use  of  intoxi- 
cating drinks,  but  Lev.  10:9,  following  Ezek.  44:21, 
forbids  the  priests  to  partake  of  them  when  they  go  to 
the  tabernacle.  Here,  too,  although  the  motive  was  a 
mixed  one,  the  law  must  have  had  some  influence  in 
promoting  general  sobriety. 

It  was  required  of  a  priest  that  he  be  physically 
sound.  The  law  was,  "No  man  of  the  seed  of  Aaron 
the  priest  that  hath  a  blemish  shall  come  nigh  to  offer 

»  Gen.  16:3;  29:24,  29. 
»  See  also  Num.  25 : 6  ff. 


THE  PRIESTLY  NARRATIVE  261 

the  offerings  of  Yahweh  made  by  fire."^  It  is  not 
strange,  therefore,  that  he  was  restricted  in  his  choice 
of  a  wife,  being  forbidden  to  marry  either  a  "profane" 
woman,  that  is,  a  devotee  from  one  of  the  Canaanite 
shrines,  or  one  who  had  been  divorced.  The  high 
priest  could  marry  only  a  virgin.^ 

The  stress  laid  upon  conjugal  loyalty  is  shown  in 
Nimi.  5:iiff.,  where  a  test  pecuKar  to  this  code  is 
ordained  for  cases  in  which  a  husband  suspects  his  wife, 
but  can  prove  nothing  against  her.  It  bears  some 
resemblance  to  two  laws  on  the  same  subject,  §§  131 
and  132,  in  the  Code  of  Hammurabi.  They  read :  (§  131) 
"If  the  wife  of  a  man,  her  husband  has  accused  her, 
and  she  has  not  been  caught  in  lying  with  another 
male,  she  shall  swear  by  God  and  shall  return  to  her 
husband."  (§  132)  "If  a  wife  of  a  man  on  account  of 
another  male  has  had  the  finger  pointed  at  her,  and  has 
not  been  caught  in  lying  with  another  male,  for  her 
husband  she  shall  plunge  into  the  holy  river."  The 
cruel  injustice  of  the  second  paragraph  is  evident; 
but  it  is  no  more  cruel  or  unjust  than  the  apphcation 
of  the  test  of  the  water  of  jealousy.  If  the  woman 
were  innocent,  she  would  suffer  as  keenly  in  her  mind 
as  if  she  were  guilty,  and  be  quite  as  likely  to  have  the 
spasms  suggested  by  the  ceremony  prescribed.  This 
would  be  the  result  until  it  was  discovered  that  the 
water  had  no  real  virtue,  and  then  the  use  of  it  would 
become  a  farce  and  anything  but  a  hindrance  to  con- 
jugal infidelity.  In  fact,  this  test  is  said  to  have  been 
discontinued  toward  the  end  of  the  first  Christian  century 
"because  there  were  too  many  adulterers."     Still,  the 

'Lev.  21:21.  »  Lev.  21:7,  13  f. 


262        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

law  must  be  regarded  as  a  well-meant,  if  futile,  protest 
against  a  great  evil. 

The  law  against  marriage  with  near  relatives'  has 
already  been  cited.  It  is  interesting,  in  the  first  place, 
as  above  suggested,  as  an  indication  of  ethical  develop- 
ment among  the  Hebrews.  The  Ephraimite  narrator, 
in  his  version  of  Abraham's  attempt  to  protect  himself 
by  concealing  his  relation  to  Sarah,  makes  him  excuse 
himself  by  saying  that  she  was  his  half-sister.  When, 
however,  the  Priests'  Code  was  compiled,  marriage 
between  near  relatives  was  considered  incestuous. 
Hence  it  was  necessary  to  omit  this  story.  This  law 
also  illustrates  the  academic  character  of  much  of  the 
later  legislation.  It  enumerates,  expressly  or  by 
inference,  no  fewer  than  seventeen  forms  of  incest. 
There  is  one  notable  omission:  a  man  is  not  forbidden 
to  marry  his  own  daughter.  Benzinger  thinks  this 
must  originally  have  been  prohibited,  but  perhaps, 
owing  to  the  fact  that  among  the  Hebrews,  as  among 
other  oriental  peoples,  daughters  had  pecuniary  value, 
there  was  little  or  no  danger  that  this  form  of  incest 
would  become  prevalent.  A  less  important  oversight 
is  that  of  the  case  of  the  mother's  brother's  wife,  although 
the  father's  brother's  wife  is  expressly  mentioned.^ 
It  should  be  noted  that  marriage  with  a  niece  or  a 
cousin  is  not  forbidden,  also  that  a  Jew  might  marry 
his  deceased  wife's  sister.^  On  the  other  hand,  when 
the  Priests'  Code  was  compiled,  the  opposition  to 
levirate  marriage,  which  appears  in  the  Book  of  Ruth,^ 
had  become  so  strong  that  it  was  thought  best  to  abohsh 

I  Lev.  i8 : 6-18.  ^  Lev.  18:18. 

*  Lev.  18 :  14.  *  Ruth  4 : 6. 


THE  PRIESTLY  NARRATIVE  263 

this  ancient  custom.^  In  harmony  with  this  innovation 
provision  was  made  by  which,  in  case  a  man  died  without 
male  issue,  his  daughter  or  daughters,  if  he  had  one  or 
more,  might  inherit.^  It  was  stipulated,  however,  that 
these  female  heirs  must  marry  within  their  own  tribe 
to  prevent  the  transfer  of  land  from  one  tribe  to  another. 

One  of  the  most  important  changes  introduced  by 
the  Priests'  Code  concerns  slaves.  Both  of  the  earlier 
codes  required  that  a  Hebrew  slave  be  released  after  six 
years  of  service.  The  Priestly  writer,  on  the  other 
hand,  who  is  careful  to  prescribe  that  the  bondman  be 
humanely  treated,  allows  him  to  be  held  until  the  year 
of  jubilee,  that  is,  in  extreme  cases,  practically  for  life. 
At  first  sight,  this  seems  retrogressive,  but  it  is  not 
entirely  so;  since  the  effect  of  such  a  law  would  naturally 
be  to  put  an  end  to  the  enslavement  of  Hebrews  for 
debt,  and  this  is  evidently  its  intent,  the  idea  being 
that  only  aliens  should  be  bought  and  sold  and  serve 
without  wages  in  the  community .^  It  should  be  added 
that  slaves  of  the  latter  class  were  treated  as  members  of 
the  family,  being  permitted,  if  circumcised,  to  partake 
of  the  passover,  and,  when  their  masters  were  priests, 
of  the  holy  things  of  the  sanctuary .^ 

The  treatment  of  cases  involving  damages  in  the 
Priests'  Code  is  peculiar.  It  appears  in  Lev.  19:20-22, 
where  the  penalty  to  be  laid  upon  a  man  for  lying  with 
another's  concubine  is  left  indefinite,  but  the  offender  is 
required  to  ^' bring  his  trespass  offering  to  Yahweh,  .... 
even  a  ram  for  a  trespass  offering."  A  number  of  other 
cases  of  a  similar  kind  are  enumerated  in  Lev.  6:2-7, 

^  Lev.  18:16;  20:21.  3  Lev.  35:45  f. 

''Num.  27:8;  36:6.  '♦Exod.  12:44;  Lev.  22:11. 


264        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

where  it  is  provided,  not  only  that  the  injury  done  be 
made  good,  and  a  ram  be  brought  for  a  trespass  offering, 
but  that  the  guilty  party  pay  a  fine  of  'Hhe  fifth  part" 
of  the  value  of  the  thing  or  things  with  reference  to 
which  loss  or  damage  has  been  inflicted.  The  size  of 
the  fine,  as  compared  with  that  imposed  for  theft  in 
the  Ephraimite  Code — two  for  one  in  the  case  of  animals 
found  alive  in  the  possession  of  the  thief,  and  four  or  five 
for  one  in  that  of  a  sheep  or  an  ox  killed  or  sold^ — is 
noticeable;  but  it  should  also  be  noted  that,  in  some 
cases,  the  fine  as  well  as  the  flesh  of  the  ram  offered 
went  to  the  priests.^ 

The  prophet  Zechariah  laid  down  the  principle, 
"Let  none  of  you  devise  evil  in  his  heart  against  his 
neighbor."^  If  this  principle  were  followed,  the  most 
serious  ills  from  which  society  suffers  would  of  course, 
be  prevented.  This  principle,  however,  has  never  been 
generally  adopted.  It  is  therefore  necessary  for  those 
who  have  the  good  will  to  ask  themselves  what  should 
be  their  attitude  toward  those  of  a  contrary  disposition. 
The  earlier  Hebrews  were  incHned  to  meet  injury  with 
resentment,  and,  when  they  were  strong  enough  so  to 
do,  with  retaliation.  The  discourses  of  the  prophets 
are  sometimes  marred  by  passages  that  betray  the 
cruelest  hatred.  Some  of  them,  like  Ezek.  25:12-14, 
are  directed  against  surrounding  nations,  who  had 
attacked  or  opposed  the  Chosen  People,  others,  like 
Jer.  20:  II  f.,  against  the  writer's  own  personal  enemies. 
The  author  of  Lev.  igriyf.  saw  the  danger  in  this 
spirit,    and    urged    its    avoidance.     First    comes    the 

*  Exod.  22: 1,  4.  3  Zech.  8: 17. 

'Lev.  5:14-16;  n  Kings  12:17. 


THE  PRIESTLY  NARRATIVE  265 

prohibition,  "Thou  shalt  not  hate  thy  brother  in  thy 
heart."  The  terms  used  give  no  clue  to  the  circum- 
stances under  which  they  were  chosen.  The  next 
clause,  however,  is  "Thou  shalt  surely  rebuke  thy 
neighbor";  which  indicates  that,  when  the  author 
forbids  hatred,  he  refers  to  the  resentment  kindled  by 
injurious  treatment.  This  becomes  still  clearer  in 
vs.  18,  where  he  adds,  "Thou  shalt  not  take  vengeance 
or  bear  any  grudge  against  the  children  of  thy  people." 
Finally,  he  lays  down  the  positive  precept,  "Thou  shalt 
love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself,"  in  which  he  anticipates 
the  teaching  of  Jesus,  where  he  says,  "Ye  have  heard 
that  it  hath  been  said,  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbor, 
and  hate  thine  enemy,  but  I  say  to  you.  Love  your 
enemies  and  pray  for  them  that  persecute  you"^;  and 
this  is  the  supreme  test  of  the  good  will  which  is  the 
fundamental  principle  of  moraHty. 

In  the  Ephraimite  Code  the  Hebrew  is  forbidden 
to  treat  another,  who  has  borrowed  money  of  him,  as 
a  debtor  was  usually  treated,^  and  in  Deuteronomy 
one  is  forbidden  to  take  discount  on  money  or  produce, 
that  is,  to  withhold  a  certain  part  or  percentage  of  the 
amount  borrowed  for  the  use  of  the  remainder.  In 
Lev.  25:36f.  both  discount  and  interest  proper  are 
prohibited  as  unworthy  of  the  people  of  Yahweh. 

The  Priests'  Code  forbids  any  charge  on  loans,  but 
it  does  not  indorse  the  Deuteronomic  provision  for  the 
release  of  Hebrew  debtors  once  in  seven  years.  It  has, 
however,  in  the  year  of  jubilee,  an  institution  that  to 
some  extent  serves  the  same  purpose.    The  law  with 

*Matt.  s:43f.  3  Deut.  23:19, 

'  Exod.  22:25. 


266        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

reference  to  it  provides  that  land  which  a  man  for  any 
reason  is  obliged  to  sell  shall  not  be  totally  ahenated/ 
but  practically  leased,  and  that,  when  the  year  of 
jubilee  arrives,  if  it  is  not  sooner  redeemed,  it  shall 
revert  to  its  original  owner.^  So,  also,  houses  in  open 
villages,^  and  those  of  the  Levites  in  cities  of  refuge.'* 
The  theory  underlying  this  law  is,  that  the  land  belongs 
to  Yahweh,s  which,  being  interpreted  in  terms  of  modern 
usage,  would  mean  that  it  is  the  property  of  the  tribe  or 
the  community.  It  is  clear  that  the  effect  of  this  law, 
which,  so  far  as  can  be  learned,  was  never  actually  put  into 
operation,  would  have  been  to  prevent  one  of  the  most 
serious  evils  with  which  governments  in  all  ages  have  had 
to  deal,  the  development  of  a  permanent  proletariat. 

The  law  with  reference  to  inheritance  in  Num. 
27:6-11,  to  which  attention  has  already  been  called, 
was  distinctly  favorable  to  women,  but  that  concern- 
ing vows  emphasized  their  dependence  either  on  their 
fathers  or  their  husbands.  The  latter  was  based  on  the 
idea  that  the  daughter  was  the  property  of  her  father 
and  the  wife  the  property  of  her  husband,  and  that 
neither  of  them  had  a  right  to  enter  into  any  engage- 
ment affecting  herself,  or  anything  else  belonging  to  her 
natural  protector,  against  his  wishes. 

All  the  codes  condemn  false  oaths,  but  the  Priests'  is 
the  only  one  that  expressly  forbids  l3dng  and  deception.^ 
Note,  also,  that  in  Exod.  6:11  (P)  Yahweh  directs 
Moses  straightforwardly  to  demand  that  Pharaoh 
"let  the  children  of  Israel  go  out  of  his  land."^ 

'Lev.  25:13-17.  "  Lev.  25 :  24-28.  3  Lev.  25:31. 

4  Lev.  25:32  f.    In  vs.  33  read  "redeem  not."  s  Lev,  25 :  23, 

f  Lev.  19:11b.  7  Cf.  Exod.  3:18;  5:3  (J). 


THE  PRIESTLY  NARRATIVE  267 

All  the  codes  also  inculcate  respect  for  parents,  but 
this  last  goes  beyond  the  others  in  requiring  reverence 
for  the  aged/  It  is  peculiar,  also,  in  that  it  forbids  the 
indignities  that  thoughtless  persons,  especially  children, 
are  apt  to  inflict  upon  the  unfortunate.  An  example 
in  point  is  that  of  the  boys  who  annoyed  Elisha  as  he 
went  up  from  Jericho. =*  The  offenses  here  mentioned 
are  cursing  the  deaf  and  putting  stumbling-blocks  in 
the  way  of  the  blind.^ 

The  attitude  of  this  code  toward  sojourners  and 
foreigners  assorts  with  the  circumstances  under  which 
it  was  compiled.  These  classes  are  not  only  protected 
by  it  from  wrong  and  violence,  but  commended  to  the 
positive  kindness  of  the  Hebrew  community.  "The 
stranger  that  sojourneth  with  you,"  it  says,  "shall  be 
to  you  as  the  home-born  among  you,  and  thou  shalt 
love  him  as  thyself.  "^  If  he  is  needy,  it  gives  him 
the  same  claim  upon  the  charity  of  his  neighbors  as  the 
native  Hebrew,  and  if  he  at  any  time  wishes  to  enjoy 
full  religious  privileges,  he  has  only  to  submit  to  cir- 
cumcision, when  he  becomes  to  all  intents  and  purposes 
a  Hebrew. 

Intermarriage  with  these  proselytes  would,  of 
course,  he  permitted.  Indeed,  there  is  no  express 
prohibition  in  this  code  to  prevent  Jews  from  taking  as 
wives  or  husbands  foreigners  not  resident  among  them. 
This  being  the  case,  it  seems  strange  that  Ezra,  who, 
according  to  Neh.,  chap.  8,  was  chiefly  instrumental 
in  procuring  the  adoption  of  the  Priests'  Code,  and 
Nehemiah,  his   co-worker,   should   be   represented   as 

»  Lev.  19:32.  3  Lev.  19 :  14. 

» II  Kings  2 :  23  ff .  4  Lev.  19 :  34. 


268        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

uncompromisingly  opposed  to  such  marriages.  The 
discrepancy  can  be  removed  by  supposing,  as  many 
do,  that  the  law  promulgated  by  Ezra  and  Nehemiah 
in  444  B.C.  was  not  the  Priests'  Code  alone,  but  the 
Pentateuch  in  substantially  its  present  form,  includ- 
ing Deuteronomy,  in  which  marriages  with  Canaanites 
are  distinctly  prohibited,  and  to  which  Ezra  griif. 
has  evident  reference.' 

The  Priests'  Code,  or  rather,  the  Law  of  Holiness, 
marks  a  new  stage  in  the  development  of  ethics  among 
the  Hebrews.  There  had,  for  a  long  time,  been  an  open 
breach  between  the  priests  and  the  prophets,  the  former 
naturally  laying  stress  upon  ceremonial  observances, 
while  the  latter  insisted  that  Yahweh  required,  first 
of  all,  exclusive  devotion  to  himself,  and  next,  habitual 
acquiescence  in  the  demands  of  the  ideal  human  Kfe. 
The  overthrow,  one  after  the  other,  of  both  Hebrew 
kingdoms  taught  the  survivors  to  acknowledge  the 
importance  of  the  ethical  in  rehgion.  The  priests  them- 
selves admitted  it,  but  they  could  not  sacrifice  the 
rehgious  observances  that  they  had  inherited  from  the 
past.  The  Law  of  Holiness  is  an  attempt  to  combine 
the  ethical  with  the  ceremonial  in  religion,  doing  justice 
to  both  elements.  Yahweh  is  holy,  and  he  requires 
that  man  also,  in  his  sphere,  be  holy.  What  this 
means  appears  from  the  various  passages  in  which 
the  requirement  is  reiterated.  According  to  Lev. 
19:2  ff.  it  forbids  marriages  between  near  relatives; 
according  to  20:2-6,  the  sacrifice  of  children  to  Moloch, 
or  the  patronage  of  aHen  diviners;  and,  according  to 
20:25  f.,  ^^^  neglect  of  the  distinction  between  clean 

«Deut.  7'^,  SI  11:8;  23:7. 


THE  PRIESTLY  NARRATIVE  269 

and  unclean  animals.  The  first  of  these  passages 
represents  the  precepts  among  which,  as  has  been  shown, 
are  some  of  the  most  lofty  to  be  found  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. Indeed,  when  Jesus,  on  being  asked  which  was 
the  first  of  the  commandments,  cited  Deut.  6:4  f.,  he 
immediately  added  that  the  second  was  the  compre- 
hensive moral  precept  in  Lev.  19:18b,  "Thou  shalt 
love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself."'  Jesus,  however,  would 
not  have  indorsed  the  Law  of  Holiness  as  a  whole,  in 
spite  of  the  excellence  of  its  morality;  nor  would  any  of 
the  great  prophets,  because  the  priests,  who,  in  Jer. 
33:i4ff.,  attached  to  a  messianic  passage  a  prediction 
of  the  perpetuity  of  their  order,  in  this  case  placed  the 
externals  of  reHgion  on  an  equality  with  morahty,  thus 
producing  a  system,  later  supplemented  by  the  new 
requirements  of  the  completed  Priests'  Code,  which, 
as  Peter  said,  proved  "a  yoke"  that  the  Jews  were 
never  "able  to  bear."^ 

^Marki2:28ff.  'Acts  15:10. 


CHAPTER  XXII 

THE  PROPHECIES  OF  ISAIAH  CHAPS.  56-66,  AND 

RELATED   PASSAGES  IN  ISAIAH  AND 

OTHER  PROPHETICAL  BOOKS 

The  righteousness  of  Yahweh  is  as  prominent  in 
these  as  in  the  preceding  sixteen  chapters.  In  Isa.  61:8 
he  declares  that  he  loves  justice.  The  term,  however, 
here  as  in  chaps.  40-55,  generally  has  reference  to  the 
intervention  of  Yahweh  in  behalf  of  his  people.  Thus, 
in  56:1  he  announces,  that  his  "salvation  is  near  to 
come,"  and  his  *' righteousness  to  be  revealed."  It 
did  not  come  as  soon  as  the  more  hopeful  expected. 
Indeed,  it  was  so  long  delayed  that  one  could  say, 
"Justice  is  far  from  us,  neither  doth  righteousness 
overtake  us";^  "We  look  for  justice,  but  there  is 
none,  for  salvation,  but  it  is  far  from  us";^  and  "Justice 
is  turned  away  backward,  and  righteousness  standeth 
afar  off."^  The  author  of  these  passages,  however, 
did  not  lose  hope.  He  sees  Yahweh  preparing  to  come 
with  retribution.  "Yahweh  saw  it,"  he  says,  "and 
it  displeased  him  that  there  was  no  justice;  .  .  .  . 
therefore  his  own  arm  brought  salvation  to  them,  and 
his  righteousness  upheld  him.  And  he  put  on  righteous- 
ness as  a  breastplate,  and  a  helmet  of  salvation  upon 
his  head;  and  he  put  on  garments  of  vengeance,  and 
was  clad  with  zeal  as  with  a  mantle.  ""*  When  his 
retributive  work  is  ended  those  "that  mourn  in  Zion" 

*Isa.  59:9.  3  Isa.  59:14. 

'Isa.  59:11.  '*Isa.  59:i5b-i7;  cf.  66:16. 

270 


ISA.,  CHAPS.  56-66,  AND  RELATED  PROPHECIES     271 

will  be  called  "trees  of  righteousness,"  in  whom  he  will 
be  glorified/  They  will  be  clothed  with  "the  garments 
of  salvation,"  and  covered  with  "the  robe  of  righteous- 
ness." "So  will  the  Lord  Yahweh  cause  righteousness 
and  praise  to  spring  forth  before  all  nations."^  In 
62:11  there  is  another  prediction  of  the  approach  of 
the  great  day,  and  in  63 :  i  ff .  a  still  more  vivid  vision 
of  the  appearance  of  Yahweh,  who  speaks  "in  righteous- 
ness, mighty  to  save." 

In  all  this  there  is  nothing  new;  but  one  has  only 
to  read  these  chapters  as  a  whole  to  find  that  the 
righteousness  of  Yahweh  here  has  a  different  back- 
ground from  that  of  chaps.  4C»-55.  In  chaps.  40-55 
the  Jews  are  in  exile,  and,  because  they  have  suffered 
enough  and  more  than  enough,  Yahweh  in  his  righteous- 
ness purposes  to  punish  those  who  have  overdone  the 
task  of  chastising  them  and  restore  the  sufferers  to 
their  heritage.  Here  the  case  is  different.  The  scene 
is  laid  in  Jerusalem.  The  good  that  the  people  desire 
is  therefore,  not  deliverance  from  bondage,  but  the 
restoration  of  prosperity.  The  prophet,  however,  tells 
them  in  the  very  first  verse  that  they  can  claim  this 
blessing  only  on  condition  that  they  "keep  justice" 
and  "work  righteousness."^  In  chap.  59  he  declares 
that  the  delay  in  the  return  of  prosperity  is  due  to  their 
failure  to  fulfil  this  condition.  He  says  of  them,  "The 
way  of  peace  they  know  not,  and  there  is  no  justice  in 
their  goings ";"*  and  further,  "Truth  is  fallen  in  the 
street,  and  righteousness  cannot  enter.  "^  Meanwhile 
"the  righteous  perisheth";^    that  is,   some  who   are 

^Isa.  61:3.  3lsa.  56:1.  sVs.  14. 

«Isa.  61:10  f.  4  Vs.  9.  <'Isa.S7:i. 


272        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

really  worthy  of  the  divine  favor  have  to  suffer  with 
their  unworthy  fellows.  The  latter  affect  surprise  that 
they  should  not  be  recognized  as  righteous.  Thereupon 
the  prophet  holds  the  mirror  of  the  moral  law  up  to 
them  and  their  lives.  In  the  first  place,  according  to 
57:3  ff.,  some  of  them  have  been  guilty  of  disloyalty 
to  Yahweh  in  paying  homage  to  other  gods.  This 
sort  of  "righteousness,"  he  tells  them,^  cannot  profit. 
There  is  another  kind  in  which  many  are  inclined  to 
boast,  but  in  which  Yahweh  takes  no  dehght.  It  is 
the  righteousness  of  those  that  seek  Crod  daily  in  the 
service  of  the  temple  and  ask  "righteous  judgments," 
that  is,  go  to  the  priests,  as  did  the  people  of  Bethel,^ 
or  to  the  Law  in  search  of  knowledge  concerning 
religious  observances.  Being  so  zealous,  they  consider 
themselves  a  people  characterized  by  righteousness,  and 
wonder  that  Yahweh  takes  no  knowledge  of  them.^ 
The  prophet  answers  their  complaint  substantially  as 
did  Zechariah  the  question  of  the  Bethehtes."*  The 
passage  puts  the  relative  value  of  the  ceremonial  and 
the  ethical  in  reHgion  so  clearly  and  strongly  that  it 
deserves  to  be  quoted  almost  entire:  "Behold,"  it 
makes  Yahweh  say,  "ye  fast  for  strife  and  contention, 

and  to  smite  with  the  fist  of  wickedness Is 

such  the  fast  that  I  have  chosen  ?  a  day  for  a  man  to 
aflaict  his  soul?  ....  Wilt  thou  call  this  a  fast,  and 
a  day  acceptable  to  Yahweh  ?  Is  not  this  the  fast  that 
I  have  chosen,  to  loose  the  bonds  of  wickedness,  to 
undo  the  bands  of  the  yoke,  and  to  let  the  oppressed 
go  free,  and  that  ye  break  every  yoke?    Is  it  not  to 

^Isa.  57:12.  3isa.  58:2f. 

»Zech.  7:iff.  -♦Isa.  58:45. 


ISA.,  CHAPS.  56-66,  AND  RELATED  PROPHECIES     273 

deal  thy  bread  to  the  hungry,  and  that  thou  bring  the 
poor  that  are  cast  out  to  thy  house  ?  when  thou  seest 
the  naked  that  thou  cover  him,  and  that  thou  hide 
not  thyself  from  thine  own  flesh?"  When  they  learn 
to  observe  this  form  of  self-denial,  the  prophet  assures 
them,  their  righteousness  will  go  before  them  and  the 
glory  of  Yahweh  will  be  their  rearward.  He  looks 
forward  to  the  time  when  tyrants  and  oppressors  will 
become  patrons  of  righteousness,^  and  all  the  people 
follow  their  direction.^  Having  thus  shown  his  people 
their  real  condition  in  the  eyes  of  Yahweh,  it  is  natural 
that,  in  the  prayer  in  which  he  voices  their  longings,^ 
the  prophet  should  entreat  Yahweh  to  ^'meet  those 
who  work  righteousness, ""*  yet  confess  that  such 
righteousness  as  they  have  is  "as  a  polluted  garment. "^ 
The  justice,  or  righteousness,  required  by  Yahweh, 
which  in  59 :  14  f .  is  called  truth,  or  loyalty,  according 
to  the  author,  or  authors,  of  these  chapters,  forbids  all 
abusive  speech  and  oppressive  action  and  requires  all 
forms  of  charity.^  He,  or  they,  would  doubtless  have 
said  that  it  excluded  anything  else  that  is  elsewhere 
condemned  like  intemperance,^  covetousness,^  and  false- 
hood,^  and  included  everything  that  is  approved, 
as,  for  example,  humiHty."  It  would  not,  however, 
apparently,  have  been  thought  inconsistent  with  intense 
satisfaction  in  the  prospect  of  seeing  those  who  were 
accounted   enemies  or  persecutors   overtaken  by  the 

^  Isa.  60 : 1 7.  3  isa.  63 : 1 5 — 64 : 1 2.  s  Isa.  64  :.6. 

"Isa.  60:21.  "Isa.  64:5. 

^Isa.  58:6f.,  9  f.;  see  also  57:1;  59:3,6,13;  60:18;  61:1,8. 

'Isa.  56:12.  5>lsa.  59:3f.,  13. 

'Isa.  56:11;  57:17.      "Isa.  57:15;  61:1;  66:2. 


274        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

most  speedy  and  violent  destruction/  Some  of  these 
are  foreigners,  but  they  are  not  condemned  on  that 
account.  Indeed,  these  chapters  are  more  favorable 
to  foreigners  than  almost  any  other  part  of  the  Old 
Testament.  Thus,  in  56:3  the  foreigner  is  assured  that 
there  is  nojreason  why  he  should  say  to  himself,  *'  Yahweh 
will  entirely  separate  me  from  his  people,"  and  in  vs.  8 
the  promise  there  implied  is  put  into  more  positive 
and  definite  language.  These  foreigners,  however, 
must  *^join  themselves  to  Yahweh,"  become  proselytes 
to  the  Jewish  religion;  "serve^  him,"  worship  him  as 
they  have  opportunity  and  observe  his  commandments; 
and  ''love  the  name  of  Yahweh,"  openly  profess  devotion 
to  him.  There  are  two  special  requirements :  observance 
of  the  Sabbath  and  loyalty  to  the  covenant  of  Yahweh. 
"Them,"  says  Yahweh,  "will  I  bring  to  my  holy  moun- 
tain," the  site  of  the  temple,  "and  grant  them  to 
rejoice  in  my  house  of  prayer;  their  burnt  offerings 
and  their  sacrifices  will  be  accepted  on  my  altar." 
Then  follows  the  general  announcement  and  invitation, 
"My  house  shall  be  called  a  house  of  prayer  for  all 
nations." 

In  the  passages  thus  far  cited  foreigners  are  recog- 
nized as  equals  entitled  to  the  same  regard  and  the  sam,e 
privileges  as  Hebrews.  It  seems,  however,  to  have 
been  difficult  for  the  author,  or  authors,  of  these  chapters 
to  maintain  this  liberal  attitude.  At  any  rate,  iii  some 
places  foreigners  take  an  inferior  relation.  Thus,  in 
60: 10  ff.,  they  come  from  all  directions,  bringing  "their 
silver  and  their  gold  with  them."    They  build  up  the 

'Isa.  57:20;  59:18;  63:15.;  65:11  f.;  66:i5ff.,  24. 
2  English,  "minister  to." 


ISA.,  CHAPS.  56-66,  AND  RELATED  PROPHECIES  275 

walls  of  Zion,  whose  gates  remain  "open  continually," 
"that  men  may  bring  ....  the  wealth  of  the  nations 
and  their  kings  led  captive."  Those  that  have  hitherto 
afflicted  her  will  "come  bending"  to  her,  and  those 
that  have  despised  her  will  "bow  themselves  down  at 
the  soles  of  her  feet."  The  climax  is  reached  in  61 : 5  f., 
where  the  prophet  predicts  that  "strangers  shall  stand 
and  feed"  the  flocks  of  the  Jews,  and  foreigners  be 
their  "plowmen  and  vinedressers."  "But  ye,"  he 
says,  "shall  be  named  the  priests  of  Yahweh;  men  shall 
call  you  the  ministers  of  our  God :  ye  shall  eat  the  wealth 
of  the  nations,  and  in  their  riches  shall  ye  glory." 
Naturally,  "that  nation  and  that  kingdom  that  will 
not  serve"  the  Chosen  People  must  "perish."^  The 
first  verses  of  chap.  63  give  a  vivid  apocalyptic  picture 
of  the  destruction  of  these  rebellious  gentiles,  "Edom," 
if  this  is  the  correct  reading,^*  representing  the  hostile 
foreign  world .^  The jiational  pride  of  the  Jews  is  here 
strongly  in  evidence;  but  the  discrepancy  between 
these  passages  and  56:6-8  is  not  greater  than  that 
between  4g:22i.  and  the  passages  that  deal  with  the 
Servant  in  chaps.  40-55.  It  must  also  be  remembered 
that  at  the  time  when  chaps.  56-66  were  written  there 
were  doubtless  some  who  would  not  have  admitted 
foreigners  even  to  a  subordinate  place  among  them. 

It  remains  to  call  attention  to  another  indication 
of  liberality  in  the  author,  or  authors,  of  these  chapters. 
In  Deut.  23:1,  it  will  be  remembered,  the  eunuch  is 

'  Isa.  60:12.  .^, 

'  Lagarde  and  others  render  vs.  i,  "Who  is  this  that  cometh  all  red, 
with  garments  redder  than  the  vintner's?" 

3Ezek.  38!.;  Zech.  14:1  ff. 


276        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

denied  admission  to  the  assembly  of  Yahweh/  In 
Isa.  56:3-5  there  is  a  special  message  for  this  class. 
The  eunuch  is  not  to  think  of  himself  as  "a  dry  tree/' 
which,  in  most  cases,  he  was  in  a  physical  sense,  since 
Yahweh  will  give  him  in  his  (Yahweh's)  house  "a 
memorial  and  a  name  better  than"  the  possession  of 
any  number  of  *'sons  and  daughters,"  the  only  con- 
ditions being  those  imposed  upon  other  worshipers, 
observance  of  the  Sabbath,  obedience  to  the  will  of 
Yahweh,  and  loyalty  to  his  covenant.  This  concession 
may  not  have  been  prompted  by  unmixed  charity, 
since  some  of  the  eunuchs  with  whom  the  author  was 
acquainted  must  have  been  men  of  wealth  and  influence. 

The  righteousness  of  Yahweh  is  among  the  doctrines 
taught  in  the  briefer  additions  made  to  the  prophetical 
books  in  the  course  of  their  history.  Thus,  in  Isa.  30: 18 
he  is  in  so  many  words  declared  to  be  "  a  God  of  justice." 
In  Isa.  3 :  10  f .  the  righteousness  of  his  government  is 
put  into  the  form  of  a  proverb : 

Blessed  is  the  righteous,  for  it  shaU  be  well  with  him; 

For  the  fruit  of  his  deeds  shall  he  eat. 

Woe  to  the  godless!  it  shall  be  ill  with  him; 

For  what  his  hands  have  wrought  shall  be  repaid  him.' 

The  pious  Jew  took  refuge  in  this  doctrine  when  hard 
pressed  by  circumstances.  Thus,  in  Mic.  7:9,  an 
unknown  glossator,  who  evidently  spoke  for  his  people 
as  well  as  himself,  says:  ^'I  will  bear  the  indignation 
of  Yahweh,  because  I  have  sinned  against  him;  until 
he  plead  my  cause,  and  execute  judgment  for  me. 
He  will  bring  me  forth  to  the  light,  I  shall  behold  his 

»  See  also  Lev.  21 :  20.  '  Similarly  Isa.  26 : 7  f . 


ISA.,  CHAPS.  56-66,  AND  RELATED  PROPHECIES     277 

righteousness.''  In  this  passage  there  is  a  hint  of  the 
pedagogic  value  of  aMction.  This  idea  is  more  clearly 
brought  out  in  two  or  three  others.  Thus,  in  Isa.  26:9 
it  is  put  into  the  proverbial  form,  "When  thy  judgments 
are  in  the  earth  the  inhabitants  of  the  world  learn 
righteousness."  In  Isa.  19:22  an  example  is  given, 
"Yahweh  will  smite  Egypt,  smiting  and  heahng." 
In  Jer.  30:11,  one  of  the  passages  by  the  addition  of 
which  later  readers  sought  to  mitigate  the  sternness 
of  the  prophet's  denunciations,  Yahweh  is  made  to  say, 
"I  will  not  make  a  full  end  of  thee;  but  I  will  correct 
thee  in  justice,  and  not  leave  thee  wholly  unpunished." 
The  moral  sovereignty  of  Yahweh,  as  the  later 
Jews  conceived  it,  is  most  frequently  presented  in 
apocalyptic  predictions  of  the  deliverance  of  the  remnant 
of  Israel  by  the  overthrow  and  subjugation  of  the  gentile 
world.  For  example,  in  Isa.  io:22f.  one  reads  of  a 
destruction  "determined,  overflowing  with  righteous- 
ness," which  "Yahweh  will  make  in  the  midst  of 
all  the  earth."  In  Hke  manner  it  is  predicted  in  Isa. 
29:175.  that  "the  terrible  one"  will  be  "brought  to 
nought,"  and  "the  scoffer"  cease,  and  "all  they  that 
watch  for  iniquity"  be  cut  off.^  The  apocalyptic  idea 
is  more  fully  developed  in  Isa.,  chaps.  24-27.  The 
author  of  these  chapters  begins  with  a  description  of 
the  desolation  wrought  in  the  earth  by  Yahweh,  who 
"maketh  it  waste,  and  turneth  it  upside  down,  and 
scattereth  its  inhabitants,"^  "because  they  have  trans- 
gressed the  laws,  violated  the  statutes,  broken  the 
everlasting  covenant."^     In  all  this  there  is  "glory  to 

^  See  also  Jer.  30: 23  f.;  Mic.  5:15. 

» Isa.  24:1.  3  Isa.  24:5. 


278        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

the  righteous,"^  but  punishment  for  ^'the  host  of  the 
high  ones  on  high,  and  the  kings  of  the  earth  on  the 
earth."^  In  Isa.,  chaps.  34  f.  there  is  an  even  more 
terrible  picture  of  the  ^' day  of  vengeance/'  the  ^'year  of 
recompense  for  the  cause  of  Zion,  "^  in  prospect  of  which 
God's  people  are  exhorted  to  *'be  strong,  fear  not." 
''Behold,"  says  the  prophet,  ''your  God  will  come  with 
vengeance,  with  the  recompense  of  God;  he  will  come 
to  save  you.""*  In  Jer.,  chap.  10,  Yahweh,  who  is 
called  ''King  of  the  nations,"^  is  entreated  to  "pour 
out  his  wrath  upon  the  nations"  that  know  him  not, 
"because  they  have  devoured  Jacob,  and  consumed 
him,  and  laid  waste  his  habitation." 

The  later  chapters  of  Zechariah  contain  vivid 
descriptions  of  the  intervention  of  Yahweh  in  behalf 
of  his  people.  Thus,  9: 14  f.  assures  them  that  Yahweh 
"will  appear  above  them,  and  his  arrow  go  forth  Hke 
Hghtning,"  as  he  comes  with  resounding  triumph  "in 
the  tempests  of  the  South"  to  protect  them;  and  12:4 
that  he  "will  smite  every  horse  with  terror,  and  its 
rider  with  madness";  while  14:12-15  describes  with 
horrible  detail  the  plague  by  which  he  will  punish 
"all  the  peoples  that  have  served  against  Jerusalem." 

These  apocal3^tic  pieces  remind  one  of  the  later 
Deuteronomic  literature.  There  is  the  same  narrow- 
ness and  the  same  tenderness  in  certain  directions, 
with  the  most  implacable  hostility  toward  all  outside 
given  Hmits.  What  could  be  more  comforting  and 
inspiring  than  Isa.  35:8-10?  Yet  the  author  is  pre- 
sumably the  same  who,  in  chap.  34,  describes  the  havoc 

^  Isa.  24:6.  3  Isa.  34:8.  s  Jer.  10:7. 

»Isa.  24:21.  4 Isa.  35:4. 


ISA.,  CHAPS.  56-66,  AND  RELATED  PROPHECIES     279 

made  by  the  divine  wrath  with  a  gusto  that  is  revolting. 
Of  the  offending  nations  he  says,  vs.  3,  *' Their  slain, 
also,  shall  be  cast  out,  and  the  stench  of  their  corpses 
shall  arise,  and  the  mountains  shall  flow  with  their 
blood."  He  is  particularly  severe  on  Edom,  of  which 
he  predicts,  vss.  9  f.,  that  *'the  streams  thereof  shall  be 
turned  into  pitch,  and  the  dust  thereof  into  brimstone; 
and  the  land  thereof  shall  become  pitch,  burning  day 
and  night;  it  shall  not  be  quenched  for  ever;  the  smoke 
thereof  shall  go  up  from  generation  to  generation: 
it  shall  He  waste  for  ever;  none  shall  pass  through  it." 
These  are  only  samples  of  the  horrors  depicted.  They 
can  only  have  been  invented  and  described  by  someone 
so  bigoted  that  he  had  become  blind  to  moral  distinc- 
tions, or  so  isolated  in  his  experience  that  he  did  not 
know  the  meaning  of  his  own  language. 

The  ethical  as  well  as  the  religious  standpoint  in 
these  prophecies  is  naturally  the  law  of  Yahweh.  Thus, 
as  already  noted,  the  earth  is  cursed  because  its  inhabit- 
ants *'have  transgressed  the  laws,  violated  the  statutes, 
broken  the  everlasting  covenant."  The  ideal  condition 
for  the  Holy  Land  and  its  people,  therefore,  is  one  in 
which  "the  deaf  shall  hear  the  words  of  the  book,  and 
the  eyes  of  the  blind  shall  see  without  obscurity  and 
without  darkness,"^  or  better,  when  the  "Teacher  will 
not  be  hidden  any  more,"  but  the  eyes  of  his  people 
will  see  him,  and  their  ears  "hear  a  voice  behind  them, 
saying,  This  is  the  way,  walk  ye  in  it,"  if  they  are  in 
danger  of  going  astray.^ 

In  the  good  time  coming  the  greatest  of  the  virtues 
will  be  justice  based  on  the  divine  law.     It  is  one  of  the 

'Isa.  29:18.  ^Isa.  30:20  f. 


28o        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

three  by  which  the  Ideal  King  will  be  characterized, 
for  his  throne  is  to  be  "established  in  kindness,"  and 
he  is  to  "sit  thereon  in  truth  (faithfulness)  in  the  tent 
of  David,  judging  and  seeking  justice,  and  swift  to 
work  righteousness."  See  Isa.  i6 : 5 ;  also  32:1.  "Then 
justice  shall  dwell  in  the  desert,  and  righteousness  in  the 
fruitful  field;  and  the  result  of  righteousness  shall  be 
peace,  and  the  effect  of  righteousness  quiet  and  con- 
fidence for  ever."' 

The  capital  will,  naturally,  be  prominent,  for 
"Yahweh  will  fill  Zion  with  justice  and  righteousness,"* 
so  that  it  will  again,  and  justly,  be  called  a  "habitation 
of  righteousness."^  The  citizen  of  the  new  Jerusalem 
will,  in  his  measure,  represent  the  righteousness  of  the 
city.  He  is  described  in  Isa.  33 :  15  as  "he  that  walketh 
righteously,  and  speaketh  uprightly;  he  that  despiseth 
the  gain  of  oppression,  that  shaketh  his  hand  from 
taking  a  tribe,  that  stoppeth  his  ears  from  hearing  of 
blood,  and  shutteth  his  eyes  from  looking  upon  evil." 
Here,  perhaps,  belongs  Hos.  12:6,  where  justice  is  one 
of  the  conditions  of  the  divine  favor. 

In  one  of  the  passages  just  cited,  Isa.  33:15,  there 
is  impHed  condemnation  of  a  class  of  persons  who  do 
the  things  that  they  ought  to  despise  and  eschew,  and 
in  32:6  ff.  the  author  names  two  classes,  fools  and 
knaves,  from  whom  nothing  but  evil  can  be  expected; 
but  there  is  in  these  pieces  Kttle  of  the  criticism  of 
Jewish  morals  that  abounds  in  the  genuine  portions  of 
the  books  to  which  they  have  been  added.  Indeed,  the 
tendency  is  to  idealize  Israel,  as  in  Isa.  26: 2,  where  they 

*  Isa.  32:16  f.;  Zech.  9:9!.  3jer.  31:23. 

» Isa.  33 : 5. 


ISA.,  CHAPS.  56-66,  AND  RELATED  PROPHECIES     281 

are  described  as  "the  righteous  nation  that  keepeth 
faith/'  and  in  26:7  whence  it  appears  that  they  are 
individually  just  and  upright.  The  unrighteous,  as 
compared  with  them,  are,  of  course,  the  foreign  peoples 
that  have  oppressed  them. 

The  second  of  the  cardinal  virtues  recommended  by 
the  prophetic  pieces  now  under  consideration  is  kind- 
ness. It,  also,  is  one  of  the  characteristics  of  the  Ideal 
King  of  Isa.  16:5.'  The  fool,  or  knave,  of  Isa.  32:5  is 
condemned  for  lack  of  kindness  to  the  hungry  and 
thirsty,  that  is,  to  the  unfortunate  of  all  classes. 

Finally,  the  ethics  of  these  pieces  requires  truth, 
both  in  the  sense  of  adherence  to  fact  and  reality  and 
in  that  of  fidelity  to  obligation.  In  Isa.  33 :  15  the  man 
who  passes  the  test  of  "everlasting  burnings"  must 
speak  uprightly.  The  coming  king  will  sit  on  his 
throne  "in  truth,''  that  is,  display  in  his  administration 
perfect  loyalty  to  the  law  of  God,  in  accordance  with 
which  it  is  his  duty  to  govern;  and  his  people  will 
be  known  and  honored  as  the  "nation  that  knoweth 
truth."  Cf.  Isa.  24:16  and  33:1,  where  the  foreign 
oppressor  is  accused  of  treachery. 

In  the  preceding  survey  it  has  not  been  possible 
to  discuss  the  ideas  of  the  Hebrews  concerning  their 
relations  with  one  another  without  reference  to  their 
attitude  toward  foreigners.  That  attitude,  so  far  as 
it  has  shown  itself,  seems  to  have  been  consistently ' 
hostile.  There  are  other  passages  that  strengthen  this 
impression,  especially  the  repeated  denunciations  of 
Edom  in  Amos  i:iif.;  Isa.  11:14;  34:5  ff.  (to  parts 
of  which  references  have  already  been  made);    Jer. 

'See  also  Hos.  12:6. 


o 


282        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

49 : 7  ff .  The  other  peoples  against  which  more  or  less 
unfriendly  oracles  have  been  inserted  into  older  col- 
lections are  Sidon/  Egypt,^  Moab,^  Ammon/  Damascus,^ 
Kedar/  and  Elam.^ 

Over  against  these  hostile  passages  must  be  placed 
;       a  series  similar  to  some  that  were  found  in  Isa.,  chaps. 
^  40-66.     The  first  to  be  cited  is  Isa.  2 : 2-4,  or  the  more 

complete  version  of  the  prophecy  in  Mic.  4 : 1-4.  Here 
Jerusalem  is  the  universal  shrine,  to  which  the  nations 
gladly  repair,  that  they  may  learn  of  Yahweh  and  obey 
his  precepts.  He  thus  becomes  an  arbiter  among  them, 
and,  since  they  can  trust  him  to  do  them  all  justice, 
they  beat  their  arms  into  implements  of  husbandry 
and  "learn  war  no  more."^  In  Isa.  19:18  ff.  there  is  a 
remarkable  departure  from  the  teaching  of  Mic.  4 :  i  ff . ; 
for  this  passage,  instead  of  requiring  all  nations  to 
recognize  Jerusalem  as  their  religious  capital,  authorizes 
the  erection  of  "an  altar  to  Yahweh  in  the  midst  of  the 
land  of  Egypt,"''  not  only  for  the  convenience  of  the 
Jews  there  settled,  but  as  a  place  of  worship  and  sacrifice 
for  the  Egyptians.'''  This  temple,  however,  was  not  to 
interfere  with  the  divine  purpose  to  bring  about  the 
union  of  the  nations.  The  author  foresaw  a  time  when 
Yahweh  could  say,  "Blessed  be  Egypt,  my  people,  and 
Assyria,  the  work  of  my  hands,  and  Israel,  my  inherit- 
ance."" The  extreme  of  HberaHty  seems  to  have  been 
reached  in  a  passage  attached  to  the  oracle  on  Sidon 

« Tyre,  Isa.  23.  ^  jer.  49 : 1-6.  '  Jer.  49 :  28-33. 

» Jer.,  chap.  46.  s  Jer.  49 :  23-27.  7  Jer.  49 :  34-39. 

3  Jer.,  chap.  48. 

*  See  also  Isa.  18:7;  Jer.  3:17;  Mic.  5:10-14;  Zech.  9:7;  i4:i6flF. 
'Isa.  19:19.  "Isa.  19:21.  "Isa.  19:25. 


ISA.,  CHAPS.  56-66,  AND  RELATED  PROPHECIES      283 

(Tyre)  in  23:15-18.  Here  Tyre  is  promised  a  restora- 
tion after  seventy  years,  with  permission  again  to  *'play 
the  harlot  with  all  the  kingdoms  of  the  world,"  but  her 
"hire''  is  to  be  dedicated  to  Yahweh,  that  his  priests 
may  "eat  sufficiently"  and  wear  "elegant  clothing." 
These  words  cannot,  of  course,  be  taken  in  their  most 
obvious  sense,  but  harlotry  must  here  be  interpreted 
as  a  figure  for  commerce  and  the  whole  as  a  prediction 
that  Tyre  will  one  day  contribute,  and  hberally,  to  the 
maintenance  of  the  temple  at  Jerusalem  and  the  priestly 
nation  ordained  to  serve  at  that  sanctuary. 


CHAPTER  XXIII 

THE  PROPHECIES  OF  OBADIAH  AND  MALACHI 

These  two  books  were  written  about  the  same  time, 
between  475  and  450  B.C.,  but  there  is  httle  similarity 
between  them. 

I.      OBADIAH 

The  brief  prophecy  of  Obadiah  has  for  its  subject 
punishment  of  the  Edomites  for  their  conduct  when 
Jerusalem  was  captured  and  the  Jews  carried  into 
captivity  by  the  Babylonians.  At  that  time  the 
Edomites  not  only  rejoiced  over  the  misfortunes  of  their 
neighbors,  but,  according  to  vss.  10  and  13  f.,  actually 
added  to  them  by  looting  the  city  and  putting  to  death 
those  who  had  escaped  from  it.  These  imneighborly 
acts  were  long  remembered  by  the  Jews,  and  always  with 
the  bitterest  resentment.'  Obadiah  finds  in  a  similar 
calamity  that  has  overtaken  Edom,  or  is  impending, 
a  penalty  for  its  former  ruthlessness.  "As  thou  hast 
done,'^  he  says,  "it  shall  be  done  unto  thee;  thy  recom- 
pense shall  return  upon  thy  head."*  This  would,  no 
doubt,  be  but  justice  under  ordinary  circumstances;  but, 
in  judging  the  Edomites,  one  must  take  into  account  the 
sujffering  that  they  endured  in  earher  times  from  the 
hands  of  the  Hebrews.^ 

'Amos  i:ii£f.;  Isa.  34:55.;  Jer.  49:75.;  Ezek.  35:iff.;  Mic. 
1:2  ff. 

^  Vs.  15b. 

3  n  Sam.  8:14;  I  Kings  22:47;  II  Kings  8:21. 
284 


PROPHECIES  OF  OBADIAH  AND  MALACHI     285 
2.      MALACHI 

When  the  books  of  Obadiah  and  Malachi  were 
written  the  temple  had  long  been  rebuilt  and  the  wor- 
ship of  Yahweh  therein  restored,  but  the  moral  and 
rehgious  condition  of  the  Jews  was  far  from  satisfactory. 
The  requirements  of  moraHty  were  widely  disregarded, 
and  many  good  people  were  in  danger  of  losing  their 
faith  in  the  righteousness  of  the  divine  government. 
They  said  openly:  *' Every  one  that  doeth  evil  is  good 
in  the  sight  of  Yahweh,  and  he  deHghteth  in  them'^ — 
that  is,  it  seems  to  make  no  difference  whether  one  does 
good  or  evil;  "where,  then,  is  the  God  of  justice?"' 
The  same  complaint  is  put  into  other  words  in  Mai. 
3:i4f.,  where  those  who  fear  Yahweh  are  represented 
as  saying:  "It  is  vain  to  serve  Gk)d;  and  what  profit  is 
it  that  we  have  walked  mournfully  before  Yahweh  of 
Hosts?  And  now  we  call  the  proud  happy;  yea,  they 
that  work  wickedness  have  been  prospered,  they  have 
even  tempted  God  and  escaped."  The  prophet  does 
not  share  this  skepticism.  Whatever  others  may  say, 
he  knows  that  Yahweh  takes  note  of  the  ways  of  men, 
and  keeps  "a  book  of  remembrance,"^  and  that,  when 
the  day  comes  for  him  to  claim  his  own,  he  will  see  that 
no  one  fails  to  "discern  between  the  righteous  and  the 
wicked,  between  him  that  serve th  God  and  him  that 
serve th  him  not."^  To  those  that  fear  his  name  "shall 
the  sun  of  righteousness  arise  with  heaHng  in  its  wings. ""» 
Meanwhile  they  are  exhorted  to  "remember  the  law  of 
Moses,"  and  observe  its  "statutes  and  ordinances" ;s 
this  law,  as  can  easily  be  shown,  being  that  of  Deuter- 

I  Mai.  2:17.  3  Mai.  3:18.  s  Mai.  4:4. 

» Mai.  3:16.  '•Mai.  4:2. 


286        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

onomy,  although  the  teaching  of  the  prophet  himself  is 
not  always  in  harmony  with  it. 

There  is,  for  example,  a  noticeable  discrepancy 
between  the  law  and  this  prophet  on  the  subject  of 
marriage.  They  both,  of  course,  condemn  adultery 
without  reservation;  but  they  differ  with  reference  to 
divorce.  In  Deuteronomy,  it  will  be  remembered,  a 
man  is  permitted  to  put  away  his  wife  *'if  she  find  no 
favor  in  his  eyes,  because  he  hath  found  some  unseemly 
thing  in  her,"  provided  he  gives  her  "a  bill  of  divorce- 
ment."^ It  seems  to  have  been  a  common  practice, 
when  the  Book  of  Malachi  was  written,  for  men  to 
take  advantage  of  this  law,  and  dismiss  their  wives 
when  they  became  old  and  no  longer  attractive.  The 
prophet  protests  against  this  practice,  warning  his 
people  lest  any  ^'deal  treacherously  against  the  wife 
of  his  youth,"  because  Yahweh  hates  '' putting  away."* 
There  is  a  new  note  in  this  passage.  In  the  references 
to  marriage  it  has  thus  far  been  viewed  as  a  commercial 
transaction.  The  husband  bought  his  wife  of  her  father 
and  she  became  his  property,  to  keep  or  discard,  as  he 
was  moved  by  passion  or  interest.  Here  marriage 
suddenly  becomes  a  covenant,  with  Yahweh  himself 
as  a  witness,  and  divorce  the  violation  of  a  covenant 
with  an  equal,  even  a  "companion"  from  youth.  This 
is  a  great  step,  really  anticipating  the  verdict  of  Jesus 
when  he  was  approached  on  the  subject,  "What  God 
hath  joined  let  not  man  put  asunder."^ 

In  the  field  of  social  ethics  the  author  of  this  book 
had  to  face  some  of  the  evils  that  had  been  condemned 
by  the  earlier  prophets.    In  Mai.  3:5  he  enumerates 

'  Deut.  24 : 1  ff .  » Mai.  2 :  15  f .  »  Matt.  19:6. 


PROPHECIES  OF  OBADIAH  AND  MALACHI      287 

the  most  flagrant  offenses  of  his  time.  Besides  sorcery 
and  adultery  there  are  false  swearing  and  the  oppression 
of  the  unfortunate,  the  hireling,  the  widow,  and  the 
orphan,  for  any  of  which  those  who  are  guilty  of  it  may 
expect  at  any  moment  to  be  overtaken  by  retribution. 
The  prophet  does  not  set  social  duties  over  against 
ceremonial  observances,  as  do  some  of  his  predecessors, 
but  he  criticizes  very  severely  both  the  priests  and  the 
people  for  the  way  in  which  they  treat  the  requirements 
of  their  religion.  The  priests  in  the  temple  offer  polluted 
bread  and  animals  that  are  bHnd,  lame,  or  sick,  thinking 
to  win  the  favor  of  their  God  with  offerings  that  their 
earthly  ruler  would  reject  with  contempt.^  The  people 
also  attempt  to  cheat  Yahweh  by  paying  their  vows  in 
blemished  animals,^  or  rob  him  by  withholding  their 
tithes  and  offerings.^  The  priests  are  also  accused  of 
having  fallen  so  far  below  the  standard  of  truth  and 
righteousness  set  by  their  fathers  that  they  have  not 
only  themselves  "turned  aside  out  of  the  way,''  but 
"caused  many"  others  "to  stumble  in  the  law,"  and 
thus  "violated  the  covenant  of  Levi."^  The  particular 
offense  laid  to  their  charge  is  that  they  "have  had 
respect  of  persons  in  the  law,"  that,  is,  have  shown 
partiality  in  the  administration  of  justice,  an  abuse 
that  is  expressly  forbidden  in  the  Deuteronomic  Code.^ 
Thus  they  have  not  only  wrought  injustice  toward 
those  who  had  a  right  to  expect  from  them  the  contrary, 
but  broken  a  covenant  with  him  by  whom  they  were 
intrusted  with  their  judicial  functions. 

^  Mai.  1:7  f.;  also  vs.  13.  ■♦  Mai.  2:8;  Deut.  33:10. 

'Mai.  1:14.  sDeut.  16:19;   24:17. 

3  Mai.  3:8. 


288        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

It  remains  to  examine  the  attitude  of  the  author  of 
Malachi  toward  foreigners.  This  topic  seems,  at  first 
sight,  to  be  covered,  and  in  a  most  satisfactory  way, 
by  2:10.  *'Have  we  not,"  says  the  prophet,  "all  one 
father?  hath  not  one  God  created  us?''  but  when  one 
takes  this  passage  with  its  context  one  finds  that  the 
prophet  is  speaking  of  the  relation,  not  of  one  man,  but 
of  one  Jew,  to  another.  He  does,  however,  in  an 
earher  passage  (i :  10  f .)  make  quite  as  notable  a  declara- 
tion as  this  would  be  if  it  could  be  given  a  universal  inter- 
pretation. It  follows  his  criticism  of  the  priests  for  the 
character  of  their  offerings,  concerning  which  he  makes 
Yahweh  say,  "  I  have  no  pleasure  in  you,  ....  neither 
will  I  accept  an  offering  at  your  hands."  Then  comes 
a  statement  that  loses  much  of  its  significance  in  the 
EngHsh  Version.  It  should  read,  "For  from  the  rising 
of  the  sun  to  the  setting  thereof  my  name  is  (not  "shall 
be")  great  among  the  gentiles,  and  in  every  place  is 
offered  to  my  name  a  pure  offering;  for  my  name  is 
great  among  the  gentiles,  saith  Yahweh  of  Hosts.'' 
This  cannot  be  interpreted  as  referring  to  the  worship 
of  Jews  in  various  parts  of  the  earth,  but  must  be 
understood  as  a  declaration  that  Yahweh  sees  in  the 
bhnd  reHgious  gropings  of  foreign  peoples  attempts  to 
reach  him  that  are  more  acceptable  than  the  half- 
hearted or  hypocritical  service  of  his  own  people. 
There  is  nothing  finer  than  this,  in  its  sympathy  for, 
and  recognition  of,  the  gentile  world,  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment; for  even  the  great  prophet  of  the  Exile  seems  not 
to  have  been  able  to  see  any  salvation  for  other  peoples 
except  in  the  acceptance  of  the  Jewish  religion.^    Indeed, 

'Isa.  49:22. 


PROPHECIES  OF  OBADIAH  AND  MALACHI      289 

it  was  some  time  before  the  disciples  of  Jesus  were  able 
to  say  with  Peter,  "Of  a  truth  I  perceive  that  God  is 
no  respecter  of  persons,  but  in  every  nation  he  that 
worketh  righteousness  is  accepted  of  him."' 

There  are  two  passages  in  the  Book  of  Malachi  that 
have  been  cited  as  conflicting  with  the  teaching  of  the 
one  just  quoted.  One  of  them  is  i:2ff.,  where  the 
prophet  describes  Edom  as  "the  people  against  whom 
Yahweh  hath  indignation  for  ever."  It  is  clear,  how- 
ever, that  resentment  against  a  given  people  for  injuries 
received  is  not  inconsistent  with  the  most  fraternal 
attitude  toward  foreigners  as  such,  especially  the 
sincerely  devout  among  them. 

The  second  passage,  2:iif.,  admits  of  no  such 
explanation;  for  it  cannot  be  denied  that  the  statement 
that  Judah  "hath  married  the  daughter  of  a  foreign 
God"  carries  with  it  condemnation  of  intermarriage 
between  Jews  and  gentiles,  and  that  this  sentiment  is 
contrary  to  that  of  i:ii.  Such  being  the  case,  it  is 
necessary  to  admit  that  the  prophet  was,  after  all, 
not  a  thoroughgoing  universalist,  or  suppose,  with 
Marti,  that  the  troublesome  passage  is  an  interpolation. 

'  Acts  10:34  f. 


CHAPTER  XXIV 
THE  BOOK  OF  RUTH 

If  the  author  of  the  Book  of  Malachi,  in  spite  of  the 
revelation  vouchsafed  him,  shrank  from  subjecting  the 
rehgion  of  Yahweh  to  the  test  of  intimate  intercourse 
with  other  peoples,  there  were  those  in  his  day  who 
were  more  consistently  liberal  in  their  attitude,  doubt- 
less, for  one  reason,  because  they  saw  in  some  foreigners 
as  fine  examples  of  manhood  and  womanhood  as  Judaism 
was  producing.  Among  them  was  the  author  of  the 
Book  of  Ruth.  At  any  rate,  this  book  has  the  force  of  a 
protest  against  an  exclusiveness  which  sometimes  shows 
itself  in  the  earHer  hterature,  but  becomes  noticeable  in 
Deuteronomy  and  seems  to  have  become  more  pro- 
nounced in  the  two  following  centuries. 

The  story,  which  is  too  familiar  to  require  rehearsal, 
incidentally  alludes  to  the  subject  of  levirate  marriage. 
This  custom  is  first  mentioned  in  Gen.  38:8  ff.,  from 
which  it  appears  that  the  brother,  or  the  next  relative, 
of  a  man  who  had  died  leaving  a  widow,  but  no  children, 
was  expected  to  marry  the  woman  and  "raise  up  seed" 
to  the  deceased.  In  Deut.  25:5J6f.  this  obligation  is 
somewhat  restricted  and  a  ceremony  prescribed  in  case 
the  surviving  relative  wished  to  be  released  from  ful- 
filling it.  In  the  Book  of  Ruth  the  object  made  promi- 
nent in  the  Deuteronomic  law  is  overshadowed  by  the 
desire  of  Naomi  to  provide  a  home  for  her  daughter- 
in-law.  Then,  too,  in  the  sequel,  the  child  born  to 
Ruth  is  reckoned  a  son,  not  of  Chilion,  but  of  Boaz, 

290 


THE  BOOK  OF  RUTH  291 

her  second  husband.  All  this,  however,  is  of  secondary 
importance.  The  lesson  of  the  book  is  found  in  the 
fact  that  Ruth  is  not  of  Hebrew  but  of  Moabite  origin; 
that  she  is  represented  as  in  every  respect  an  admirable 
character;  and  that,  by  her  marriage  with  Boaz  she 
becomes  an  ancestress,  great-grandmother,  of  the 
national  hero,  David.  It  should  also  be  noted  that  the 
author  takes  pains  in  4:12  to  refer  to  Tamar,  the 
Canaanite  mother  of  the  tribe  of  Judah.  He  could 
hardly  have  testified  more  clearly  to  the  total  absence 
in  him  of  prejudice  against  foreigners. 

There  are  two  minor  points  that  should  not  be 
overlooked.  The  first  has  reference  to  a  feature  of  the 
character  of  Ruth,  her  loyalty  to  her  mother-in-law 
as  expressed  in  the  classic  passage:  ^'Entreat  me  not 
to  leave  thee,  and  return  from  following  after  thee;  for 
whither  thou  goest  I  will  go,  and  where  thou  lodges t 
I  will  lodge;  thy  people  shall  be  my  people  and  thy  Gk)d 
my  God;  where  thou  diest  I  will  die,  and  there  will  I 
be  buried;  Yahweh  do  so  to  me,  and  more  also,  if 
aught  but  death  shall  part  thee  and  me."'  The  second 
point  relates  to  the  character  of  Bi^az.  He  is  an  ideal  l^^^ 
Hebrew:  dignified,  but  genial;  honorable  and  con- 
siderate in  his  deahngs  even  with  the  lowliest;  and 
generous  toward  all  who  need  his  sympathy  or  assistance. 

^Ruth  i:i6f. 


/   CHAPTER  XXV 

^    THE  BOOK  OF  JOB 

The  importance  of  the  Book  of  Job  in  any  discussion 
of  the  ethics  of  the  Old  Testament  cannot  be  over- 
estimated, since,  as  will  appear,  it  shows  how  deeply 
the  Hebrews  thought  on  the  subject  of  moral  obligation, 
and  how  high,  at  the  highest,  was  their  standard  of  virtue. 

The  book,  however,  as  already  intimated,  is  not 
strictly  a  unit.  In  the  first  place,  one  must  distinguish 
between  the  framework,  in  simple  prose,  and  the  poetical 
interchange  in  which  the  theme  suggested  by  the  pro- 
logue is  discussed.  The  most  plausible  theory  with 
reference  to  the  former  is  that  it  was  based  on  a  folk- 
tale to  which  there  are  references  in  Ezek.  14 :  14,  20.  On 
this  supposition  the  ethical  teaching  of  the  framework 
should  be  comparatively  simple;  and  so  it  is.  Thus, 
Job  is  introduced  as  "perfect  and  upright,' ''  and  the 
reader  is  allowed  to  infer  that  his  prosperity  is  due  to 
the  excellence  of  his  character.  This  is  assumed  when 
Yahweh  commends  him  to  the  attention  of  the  Adver- 
sary, and  the  latter  declares  that  he  practices  the 
virtues  attributed  to  him  only  for  the  sake  of  the  reward 
that  Yahweh  has  attached  to  them.^  Job,  by  his  con- 
duct under  affliction,  refutes  this  accusation.  He  makes 
no  claim  upon  Yahweh,  but  regards  the  blessings  he  has 
enjoyed,  even  after  they  have  been  withdrawn,  as  divine 
favors  for  which  he  cannot  but  be  thankful.^  *'In  all 
this,''  says  the  narrator,  "Job  sinned  not;   nor  did  he 

*  Job  1:1.  "Jobi.'iof.  3  Job  1:21;  2:10. 

292 


THE  BOOK  OF  JOB  293 

ascribe  to  God  anything  unseemly."^  It  does  not 
appear  just  what,  according  to  the  original  story,  his 
friends  said  to  him  or  what  he  repHed;  but  it  is  clear 
from  42:7  that,  although  they  unintentionally  played 
into  the  hands  of  the  Adversary,  he  did  not  change  his 
position,  "the  Adversary,  therefore,  was  disappointed 
and  his  victim  vindicated.  Finally,  Yahweh  testified 
his  approval  of  Job,  not  only  by  rebuking  his  friends 
for  their  attempts  to  instruct  him,*  but  by  reversing 
his  fortunes  and  blessing  his  "latter  end"  *'more  than 
his  beginning."^  The  teaching  of  the^tory,  therefore,  j 
is  thatj.jwrhile  men  should  not  serve  God  and  practice 
virtue  for  the  sake  of  personal  advantage,  the  good  may, 
except  when  God  for  some  wise  reason  ordains  otherwise, 
ejqpect  to  enjoy  a  richer  portion  of  the  things  that  make 
for  happiness  than  the  bad  in  the  present  life. 

The  poetical  part  of  the  book  consists  of  a  disputa- 
tion between  Job  and  four  others,''  followed  by  three 
speeches  by  Yahweh  and  two  very  brief  sections  in 
which  Job  makes  his  submission.^  The  unity  of  these 
chapters  is  a  subject  on  which  there  is  difference  of 
opinion,  the  majority  of  recent  critics  denying  the 
genuineness  of  the  Elihu  speeches,  while  some,  Hke 
Duhm,  claim  to  have  discovered  other  more  or  less 
extended  interpolations.  The  most  important,  from 
the  ethical  point  of  view,  of  these  suspected  passages 
is  chap.  24;  but  the  omission  of  both  this  and  chaps. 
32-37  will  but  sHghtly  affect  the  result  of  the  present 
investigation.  For  a  more  detailed  statement,  see  the 
end  of  this  chapter. 

^  Job  1:22.  3  Job  42:10,  12.  s  Job  38: 1 — 42:6. 

'  Job  42 : 7.  *  Job,  chaps.  3-37. 


294        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

The  discussion  in  chaps.  3-31  is  brought  on  by- 
Job,  who,  according  to  the  author,  instead  of  accepting 
his  misfortunes  in  silence,  or,  as  in  the  original  legend, 
defending  Yahweh  against  his  wife,  breaks  into  an 
impassioned  lament  in  which  he  curses  the  day  of  his 
birth,  declares  that  the  dead  alone  are  happy,  and 
complains  that  he  himself  cannot  ''find  the  grave."^ 
He  does  not,  however,  here  seek  a  reason  for  his  suffer- 
ings; much  less  does  he  accuse  God  of  injustice  for 
permitting  him  to  be  afHicted.  It  is  his  friends  who 
undertake  to  explain  why  he  suffers;  also  how,  and 
how  only,  he  can  find  relief. 

Their  first  spokesman  is  Eliphaz,  the  Temanite. 
He  begins  by  giving  Job  credit  for  fear  of  God^  and 
suggesting  that,  as  a  man  of  integrity,  he  has  a  right 
in  due  time  to  expect  again  to  enjoy  the  divine  favor.^ 
He  finds  ground  for  this  comforting  suggestion  in  human 
experience,  the  result  of  which  he  puts  into  a  rhetorical 
question, 

Who  that  was  innocent  hath  perished  ? 

And  where  have  the  upright  been  destroyed  ?^ 

This  is  precisely  the  teaching  of  the  earlier  books  of  the 
Old  Testament,  according  to  which  the  righteous  are  re- 
warded for  their  righteousness  in  time.  They  also  teach 
that  the  wicked  are  punished  for  their  wickedness  this 
side  the  grave ;  which  Eliphaz  puts  into  the  words. 

They  that  plow  iniquity, 
And  sow  trouble,  reap  it; 
By  the  breath  of  God  they  perish, 
And  by  the  blast  of  his  anger  are  they  consumed.^ 

'Johs'.iS.  3  Job  4:6.  s  Job  4:8 f. 

'Job  4:2.  '♦Job  4:7. 


THE  BOOK  OF  JOB  295 

There  are,  he  admits,  apparent  exceptions,  a  "foolish" 
person  who  prospers  or  a  righteous  who  suffers;  but 
he  finds  no  difficulty  in  explaining  such  cases.  The 
prosperity  of  the  wicked  is  but  temporary.  Again  he 
appeals  to  experience: 

I  have  seen  the  foolish  taking  root; 
But  his  dwelling  suddenly  mouldered.* 

As  for  the  righteous  who  suffer,  they  should  regard  their 
sufferings  as  discipHnary,  and  comfort  themselves  with 
the  reflection  that  he  who  "maketh  sore"  "bindeth  up,"^ 
and  that  finally  they  will  come  to  their  graves 

in  vigor, 
As  a  shock  of  grain  is  brought  home  in  its  season.* 

Job  finds  no  comfort  in  the  speech  of  Eliphaz. 
Indeed,  he  declares  that  his  friends  have  disappointed 
him,  Hke  the  brook  that  overflows  in  winter,  when  no 
one  is  looking  for  water,  but  runs  dry  in  summer,  when 
the  thirsty  seek  it  for  refreshment."*  He  invites  them, 
instead  of  reproving  him  for  complaining  at  his  lot, 
to  show  him  wherein  he  has  deserved  it.^  This  does 
not  imply  that  he  thinks  himself  without  fault.  He 
more  than  once,  in  the  course  of  his  successive  speeches, 
admits  that  he  is  not  perfect.  He  does  not,  however, 
admit  that  he  has  intentionally  neglected  any  known 
duty  to  God  or  man.  This  passage,  therefore,  is 
naturally  interpreted  as  one  of  those  in  which  he  asserts 
his  integrity  over  against  the  inferences  of  his  friends. 
It  is  the  evident  intention  of  the  poet  to  represent  his 
hero  as  holding  that  loyalty  to  every  known  obligation 

'Job  5:3.  3  Job  5:26.  sjob6:24ff. 

"Job  5:25.  '♦Job  6:  IS  ff. 


296        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

ought,  if  God  is  really  a  moral  governor,  to  win  his 
favor.  But  what  of  the  involuntary  trespasses  which 
the  best  of  men  are  liable  to  commit  ?  The  Law  made 
provision  for  such  cases,  prescribing  a  sacrifice  by  which 
the  priest  should  make  atonement  for  the  offender;^ 
and  Job  himself,  according  to  1:5,  was  accustomed 
to  make  similar  offerings  for  his  children  after  their 
feasts,  lest  they  should  have  ^'sinned  and  blasphemed 
God  in  their  hearts."  It  is  not  strange,  therefore,  to 
find  that  he  here  objects  to  being  watched  like  **a 
dragon"^  and  examined  "every  moment, '^^  as  his  friends 
would  have  him  beheve,  and  having  to  suffer  as  he  is 
suffering  for  unavoidable  lapses  from  the  divine  standard. 
He  protests, 

If  I  have  sinned,  .... 

Why  dost  thou  not  pardon  my  transgression, 

And  remove  my  iniquity  ? 

He  adds  what  shows  that,  thus  far  at  least,  he  has  had 
no  thought  of  reward  or  penalty  in  a  future  Hfe, 

For  now  I  shall  lie  down  in  the  dust, 
And,  if  thou  seek  me,  I  shall  be  gone.< 

Which  means  that,  unless  God  speedily  intervenes  to 
rescue  him,  it  will  be  too  late. 

Bildad,  the  Shuhite,  when  he  comes  to  speak, 
adds  nothing  material  to  the  discussion.  He  rebukes 
Job  for  questioning  the  justice  of  God,  but  assures 
him  that,  although  his  children  have  been  destroyed 
for  their  transgressions,  he  may,  by  "supplication  to 
the  Almighty,"  if  he  is  really   "pure  and  upright," 

»  Num.  15:275.  3  Job  7:18. 

'Job  7:12.  « Job  7:20!. 


THE  BOOK  OF  JOB  297 

again  rejoice  in  prosperity.'  He  closes  with  the  con- 
trasted statement, 

Lo,  God  will  not  reject  a  perfect  man; 

Neither  will  he  lay  hold  upon  the  hands  of  (support)  evil 
doers.^ 

Bildad  did  not  contribute  anything  to  the  solution 
of  Job's  difficulties,  but  he  furnished  him  with  a  text 
for  a  continuation  of  the  complaint  of  chap.  7.  ''God 
will  not  reject  a  perfect  man,"  said  the  sage.  "True," 
retorts  Job,  "but  how  can  one  be  just  (defend  his  integ- 
rity) before  God?"  Then  he  proceeds  to  show  that 
it  is  impossible,  at  least  for  him,  for  one  reason  because 
God  will  not  meet  him  face  to  face.     He  says: 

Lo,  he  passeth  by  me,  and  I  see  him  not, 
He  moveth  onward,  and  I  perceive  him  not;^ 

and  again, 

If  I  called,  he  would  not  answer  me; 

I  should  not  believe  that  he  gave  ear  to  my  voice.^ 

He  doubts  whether  it  would  avail  him  anything  to 
meet  the  Almighty,  because,  secondly,  God  is  so  "mighty 
in  strength,"  that  he  (Job)  would  be  forced  to  take  the 
tone,  not  of  a  plaintiff,  but  of  a  supphant;^  or,  if  he 
undertook  to  maintain  his  innocence,  his  own  mouth 
would  betray  him;^  so  great  would  be  the  awe  and 
terror  inspired  by  the  divine  presence.  Even  under 
the  most  favorable  circumstances  there  would  be  no 
chance  of  vindication,  because,  thirdly,  God  is  so 
"wise  of  heart"  that,  "if  he  should  be  pleased  to  con- 
tend" with  Job,  the  poor  man  could  not  meet  "one  in 

'Job  8:35.  3  Job  9:11.  s  Job  9:15. 

'Job  8: 20.  '♦Job  9:16  (Gr.).  6jobg.2Q. 


298        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

a  thousand"  of  his  requirements/  In  9:30  he  puts  it 
more  picturesquely: 

If  I  should  wash  myself  in  snow-water, 
And  cleanse  my  hands  in  lye, 
Then  thou  wouldst  dip  me  in  offal, 
So  that  my  friends  would  abhor  me. 

Therefore  he  says, 

It  is  all  one;  .... 

He  destroyeth  the  perfect  with  the  wicked;' 

and, 

If  I  be  wicked,  woe  to  me; 

iGid  if  I  be  righteous,  Ilhall  not  lift  up  my  head.3 

In  the  face  of  these  equally  cruel  alternatives  he  cries 
to  the  God  whom  he  seems  unable  either  to  please  or 
to  escape: 

Wherefore,  then,  hast  thou  brought  me  forth  from  the  womb  ?< 
Let  me  alone,  that  I  may  brighten  a  little, 
Before  I  go  whence  I  shall  not  return.^ 

The  most  saKent  feature  of  chaps.  9  f .  is  the  stub- 
bornness with  which  Job  insists  on  his  integrity.  In 
9:21  he  declares  in  so  many  words  that  he  is  "perfect," 
that  is,  innocent  of  any  conscious  departure  from 
rectitude,  and  in  10:7  that  God  knows  that  he  is  ''not 
wicked."  Nothing  could  more  profoundly  shock  such 
men  as  his  friends.  When,  therefore,  Zophar,  the 
Naamathite,  speaks,  he  begins  by  rebuking  Job  as  a 
blasphemous  boaster  for  saying, 

My  walk  is  clean,  .' 

And  I  am  pure  in  his  eyes,^ 

*  Job  9: 2.  3  Job  10:15.  s  Job  10: 20  f. 

»Job9:32.  4job  10:18.  611. 4  (Gr.). 


THE  BOOK  OF  JOB  299 

and  by  telling  him  plainly  that  he  is  suffering,  not  more, 
but  less,  severely  than  his  presumption  deserves.  Then, 
in  the  same  superior  tone,  he  assures  the  sufferer  that 
if  he  will  appeal  to  God  and  put  away  his  iniquity, 
he  may  yet  lift  up  his  face  ''without  spot"  and  make  his 
life  ''clearer  than  noonday";'  but  he  reminds  him 
that  the  only  refuge  of  the  wicked  is  death. 

Hitherto,  although  Job  has  refused  to  accept  the 
diagnosis  by  which  his  friends  have  attempted  to 
explain  his  unhappy  condition,  and  frankly  confessed 
his  disappointment  in  them,  he  has  treated  them  with 
ordinary  courtesy.  Now,  however,  irritated  beyond 
endurance  by  the  "continual  dropping"  of  their  shallow 
and  monotonous  reflections,  he  begins  with  the  ironical 
remark, 

No  doubt  ye  are  the  people, 
And  wisdom  will  die  with  you!* 

and  follows  it  with  the  impatient  assertion, 

I  have  understanding  as  well  as  ye: 

Yea,  who  knoweth  not  such  things  as  these  ?' 

which  is  strengthened  by  the  addition  of  the  rhetorical 

questions. 

Doth  not  the  ear  try  words, 

As  the  palate  tasteth  the  food  ? 

Is  there  wisdom  in  years, 

And  in  length  of  days  understanding  ?4 

See,  also,  13:2,  where  he  repeats  in  substance  the 
assertion  of  11:3. 

This  declaration  of  independence  is  not  a  mere 
outburst  of  impatience.     By  it  Job  serves  notice  on  his 

'Job  11:13  ff.  3 Job  12:3. 

'Job  12:2.  4  Job  12:11  f. 


300        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

friends  of  a  changed  attitude,  not  only  toward  them, 
but  toward  his  Maker,  and  at  once  proceeds  to  show 
that  a  new  spirit  has  taken  possession  of  him.  In  the 
first  place,  not  content  with  simply  rebuking  them,  he 
now  takes  the  aggressive  against  them.  They  have 
accused  him  of  blasphemy  because,  on  the  supposition 
that  God  rewarded  and  punished  according  to  conduct, 
he  could  not  see  the  justice  of  the  misfortunes  that  had 
befallen  him.  He  now  accuses  them  of  blindly  accepting 
the  principle  that  whatever  is,  is  right,  and  thus  virtually 
denying  the  moral  character  of  the  divine  government. 
He  says: 

Will  ye  speak  injustice  for  God, 

And  pour  forth  deception  for  him  ? 

Will  ye  favor  the  Almighty, 

Or  will  ye  strive  for  God  ?^ 

He  warns  them  that,  if  they  do,  so  far  from  winning 
his  favor,  they  will  only  incur  his  displeasure : 

He  will  sternly  rebuke  you, 
If  ye  secretly  favor  him." 

He  wonders  that  they  dare  persist  in  their  ignorant 
and  gratuitous  apologetic: 

Doth  not  an  uprising  by  him  affright  you, 
And  the  dread  of  him  fall  upon  you  ?3 

The  verses  quoted  have  a  humorous  suggestion. 
It  is  sometimes  very  amusing  to  see  the  mingled  surprise 
and  mortification  that  shows  itself  when  such  men  as 
Job's  friends  find  themselves  the  accused  instead  of 
the  accusers.  There  is,  however,  a  more  serious  side 
to  the  matter.    The  attack  by  which  Job  puts  his 

^  Job  13:7  f.  'Job  13:10.  3 Job  13:11. 


THE  BOOK  OF  JOB  301 

tormentors  on  the  defensive  puts  him  into  a  new  attitude, 
or,  better,  reveals  his  real  attitude,  toward  God;  namely, 
that  of  a  defender,  instead  of  a  denier  of  the  moral 
character  of  the  divine  government.  It  is  the  thorough- 
ness of  his  conviction  on  this  point  that  makes  him 
assert  his  integrity.  It  is  his  only  remaining  asset,  and  at 
the  same  time,  he  believes,  the  only  possession  by  which  he 
can  ever  hope  to  obtain  acceptance  with  God.     He  says, 

Yet  I  will  maintain  my  way  before  him; 

It  is  also  my  salvation 

That  a  godless  man  cometh  not  before  him.* 

He  is  determined  to  stand  by  his  own  conscience,  even 
if  he  dies  without  being  vindicated.^  He  cannot  deny 
the  possibihty  of  such  an  outcome,  since  he  knows  that 
one  cannot  "bring  a  clean  thing  out  of  an  imclean,"^ 
that  is,  that  he  is  human,  and  that  therefore  he  cannot 
satisfy  the  divine  standard;  but  he  is  not  without  hope, 
if  God  will  grant  him  an  untrammeled  hearing.  He 
pleads  for  one : 

Only  do  not  two  things  to  me; 

Then  will  I  not  hide  myself  from  thee: 

Withdraw  thy  hand  far  from  me, 

And  let  no  dread  of  thee  affright  me; 

Then  call  thou,  and  I  will  answer, 

Or  I  will  speak,  and  do  thou  reply  to  me.^ 

In  this  way  he  hopes  to  learn  the  extent  of  his  iniquity, 
if  he  has  unconsciously  sinned,  and  to  make  atonement 
for  his  transgressions. s 

This  appeal  remains  unanswered.     God  gives  no 
sign,  and  Job  falls  into  gloomy  reflections  on  the  brevity 

»Job  13:15  f.  3 Job  14:4.  sjob  13:23. 

'Job  13:1,  15a.  <Job  13:20-22. 


302        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

and  uncertainty  of  human  existence.  In  the  midst  of 
them  a  comparison  in  which  he  indulges  suggests  the 
thought  that,  if  man  lived  a  second  time,  as  the  tree 
that  is  felled  sprouts  and  grows  again,  he  could  afford 
to  suffer  to  the  end  of  the  first  stage.  This  is  his  way 
of  putting  it : 

All  the  days  of  my  service  would  I  wait, 
Till  my  release  came. 
Thou  wouldst  call,  and  I  should  answer; 
Thou  wouldst  long  for  the  work  of  thy  hands.' 

Here,  however,  when  he  seems  on  the  point  of  finding 
a  solace  for  his  sufferings,  he  drops  the  new  thought 
and  relapses  into  pessimism.  He  concludes  by  saying 
of  man. 

But  his  flesh  giveth  him  only  pain,  , 

And  his  soul  bringeth  him  only  sorrow.* 

The  three  friends  have  now,  one  after  another, 
spoken,  and  Job  still  remains  unconvinced.  Eliphaz 
makes  a  second  attempt,^  but  there  is  nothing  new  in 
his  speech,  except  the  tartness  with  which  he  repays 
Job^s  disrespect  for  him  and  his  colleagues,  and  the 
significant  omission  of  any  reference  to  the  rewards 
of  the  righteous,  while  the  misfortunes  in  store  for  the 
wicked  are  depicted  with  a  haunting  vividness. 

Job  is  quick  to  catch  the  speaker's  meaning.  He 
sees  in  it  a  verdict  against  him.  Naturally,  he  is 
disappointed.  He  puts  his  disappointment  into  the 
familiar    paradox,    *' Troublesome    comforters    are    ye 

^Job  14:14  f. 

2  Job  14:23.  This  verse  is  usually  interpreted  as  a  description  of 
the  condition  of  man  in  Sheol,  but  vs.  12  hardly  permits  such  an  inter- 
pretation. 

3  Chap.  15. 


THE  BOOK  OF  JOB  303 

all."^  Then,  as  he  looks  about  him  for  a  real  friend 
and  sees  nothing  but  hostihty,  he  breaks  into  a  new- 
complaint  in  the  course  of  which  he  again  protests  his 
innocence : 

My  eyes  are  red  with  weeping, 

And  on  my  eyelids  is  darkness; 

Although  there  is  no  violence  in  my  hands, 

And  my  prayer  is  pure.=^ 

The  contrast  thus  presented  prompts  him  to  an  out- 
burst in  which  the  growing  conviction  that  he  will 
one  day  be  vindicated  again  seeks  expression: 

O  earth,  cover  not  my  blood, 
And  let  there  be  no  rest  for  my  cry! 
Lo,  even  now  is  my  witness  in  heaven, 
And  my  voucher  on  high. 3 

Realizing  how  completely  his  earthly  friends  have 
deserted  him,  he  appeals  once  more  to  the  heavenly 
both  to  act  as  his  judge  and  be  surety  for  him  at  his 
own  tribunal  ;"*  but  he  fears  that,  unless  he  is  speedily 
reHeved,  he  will  not  Hve  to  hear  the  verdict.^ 

Bildad,  in  his  second  speech,^  takes  his  cue  from 
EKphaz,  and,  after  rebuking  Job  for  his  impatience, 
treats  him  to  another  description  of  the  fate  of  the 
wicked. 

In  reply  Job  insists  that  it  is  not  he,  but  God,  who 
has  done  injustice,^  and,  in  support  of  his  contention, 
recites  the  wrongs  that  he  has  suffered.  Having  thus 
given  vent  to  his  misery,  he  appeals  to  his  friends  for 
sympathy,  but,  as  if  suddenly  reminded  that  his  only 


^Job  16:2. 

4  Job  17:3. 

fi  Chap.  18. 

'Job  i6:i6f. 

s Job  17:11. 

'Job  19:6. 

3  Job  i6:i8f. 

304        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

hope  is  in  God,  he  cheers  himself  with  the  triumphant 
confession : 

But  I  myself  know  that  my  redeemer  liveth, 
And  one  will  later  arise  over  the  dust; 


And  without  my  flesh  I  shall  see  God: 

Whom  I  shall  see  for  myself, 

And  my  eyes  shall  behold,  and  not  a  stranger. 

He  is  so  wrought  upon  by  the  vision  that  he  exclaims, 
My  reins  are  consumed  within  me!^ 

He  concludes  with  a  warning  to  his  critics  not  to  persist 
in  their  attempts  to  correct  him,  lest  his  avenger,  on 
his  appearance,  bring  them  to  judgment.^ 

Zophar,  so  far  from  heeding  this  warning,  also  takes 
for  granted  Job's  guilt,  and  ventures  to  suggest  some 
of  the  ways  in  which  he  has  offended:^  namely,  by 
neglecting,  or  even  robbing  and  oppressing,  his  poor 
neighbors. 

Job,  having,  in  his  last  speech,  reached  a  tolerable 
position  with  reference  to  his  personal  experience, 
ignores  the  insinuations  of  the  last  speaker  and  attacks 
the  general  proposition  on  which  his  friends  have  been 
ringing  the  changes,  that  the  wicked  suffer  for  their 
offenses,  either  in  their  own  lives  or  in  those  of  their 
children.     He  objects,  in  the  first  place,  that 

They  finish  their  days  in  prosperity, 
And  go  down  in  peace  to  Sheol;4 

and,  secondly,  on  the  supposition  that  the  fathers  are 
punished  in  their  children : 

» Job  19 :  25-27.  »  Chap.  20. 

'  Job  19 :  28  f .  4  Job  21 :  13. 


THE  BOOK  OF  JOB  305 

God  layeth  up  his  iniquity  for  his  children! 

Let  him  repay  him  that  he  may  feel  it. 

Let  his  own  eyes  see  his  destruction; 

And  let  him  drink  of  the  wrath  of  the  Almighty. 

For  what  careth  he  for  his  house  after  him, 

When  the  number  of  his  months  is  ended  ?* 

His  experience  is  that 

One  dieth  in  his  full  strength, 
Being  wholly  at  ease  and  quiet; 

And  another  dieth  in  bitterness  of  soul, 
And  never  tasteth  good. 
They  lie  down  alike  in  the  dust. 
And  the  worm  covereth  them." 

In  his  third  speech^  Eliphaz,  ignoring  the  invitation 
to  a  more  general  discussion,  confines  himself  almost 
entirely  to  the  case  of  Job,  and  accuses  him  more  openly 
than  he  or  either  of  his  colleagues  has  hitherto  done  of 
"great  wickedness,"  specifying  various  forms  of  cruelty 
to  the  unfortunate.  He  does  not  stop  with  these 
accusations,  but  adds  an  exhortation  to  come  to  terms 
of  peace  with  God,  assuring  him  that 

He  delivereth  the  innocent, 

Yea,  he  is  delivered  through  the  cleanness  of  his  hands.< 

In  reply  Job  gives  expression  to  an  earnest  desire 
to  meet  his  Judge,  to  "come  even  to  his  seat,"^  and  at 
the  same  time  to  a  firm  conviction  that,  if  he  could  have 
such  an  opportunity,  God  would  "give  heed"  to  him,^ 
and  he  (Job)  would  "come  forth  as  gold."^    He  cannot, 

^  Job  21:19-21.  4  Job  22:30.  'Vs.  6. 

'Job  21:23,  25  f.  s  Job  23:3.  '  Vs.  10. 

3  Chap.  22. 


3o6        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

however,  persuade  himself  that  his  desire  will  be  fulfilled, 
God  having  apparently,  by  an  arbitrary  exercise  of  his 
sovereignty,  decreed  his  destruction: 

He  hath  willed,  and  who  will  reverse  it  ? 
And  what  his  soul  desired  he  hath  done.^ 

Bildad,  in  his  third  speech,  a  part  of  which,  chap.  26, 
is  attributed  to  Job,='  dwells  on  the  greatness  of  God,  in 
view  of  which  he  asks, 

How,  then,  can  man  be  just  before  God  ? 

Or  how  can  he  be  clean  that  is  born  of  a  woman  ?« 

adding, 

Lo,  even  the  moon  hath  no  brightness, 

And  the  stars  are  not  pure  in  his  sight; 

How  much  less  man  that  is  a  worm,  , 

And  the  son  of  man  that  is  a  grub!* 

The  thought  of  man's  weakness  and  imperfection 
as  compared  with  God  was  very  clearly  presented  by 
Job  himself  earher  in  the  discussion,  but  he  did  not 
then  admit  that  inability  to  reach  the  divine  standard 
was  an  unpardonable  fault  in  his  character.  He  still 
maintains  that,  although  he  is  not  in  favor  with  the 
Almighty,  he  has  not  consciously  offended.     He  says, 

My  righteousness  will  I  hold  fast,  and  not  let  it  go. 
My  heart  reproacheth  me  not  for  my  days.s 

The  rest  of  chap.  27,  from  vs.  8  onward,  which  is 
also   attributed   to   Job,   should   probably,    as   Duhm 

^  Job  23 :  13.  Chap.  24  is  included  in  the  received  text  of  Job's 
speech,  but  it  is  entirely  out  of  character,  and  therefore  must  be  from 
another  hand  than  that  of  the  original  poet,  except  perhaps  vs.  25. 

'According  to  Duhm,  26:1  should  be  canceled,  and  vss.  2-4 
inserted  between  25:1  and  2. 

3  Job  25:4.  <  Job  25:5  f.  s  Job  27:6. 


THE  BOOK  OF  JOB  307 

suggests,  be  put  into  the  mouth  of  Zophar.  He  is  thus 
permitted  to  make  a  third  speech,  Hke  the  other  friends, 
and  repeat  in  substance  what  he  said  in  chap.  20  about 
the  fate  of  the  wicked. 

The  answer  to  this  speech  is  found  in  chaps.  29,  30, 
except  vss.  1-8,  and  31.  In  chap.  29  Job  describes  the 
happiness  of  his  earher  condition,  when  the  Almighty 
was  yet  with  him,^  and  he  enjoyed,  not  only  abundant 
prosperity,  but  the  gratitude  and  reverence  of  his 
fellows,  and  expected  to  multiply  his  days  ^'as  the  sand," 
because  he  punished  injustice  and  delivered  all  that 
suffered  from  their  misfortunes.  In  chap.  30  he  pic- 
tures the  change  in  his  fortunes,  exposed,  as  he  now  is, 
to  indignities  from  the  lowest  of  his  kind,^  and  tortured 
by  incessant  physical  suffering,^  "a  brother  to  jackals 
and  a  companion  of  ostriches. "^ 

This  vivid  and  realistic  picture  furnishes  a  new  occa- 
sion for  the  question  why  Job  is  so  severely  afflicted. 
The  poet,  if  he  had  allowed  Job's  friends  to  speak  a 
fourth  time,  could  only  have  put  into  their  mouths 
the  shallow  reflections  on  his  character  with  which  they 
have  already  wearied  him.  To  avoid  such  ^'vain 
repetitions,"  he  allows  Job  in  chap.  31  to  anticipate 
their  explanation  and  refute  it  by  the  most  detailed 
and  effective  defense  that  he  has  attempted.  It  is  in 
the  form  of  a  recital  wherein  he  defines  his  attitude 
toward  his  fellows  and  describes  his  past  conduct  in 
his  various  domestic  and  social  relations.  It  is  a 
remarkable  showing.  The  object  of  the  author  was, 
no  doubt,  to   clothe  his  hero  with  the  finest  moral 

'  Vs.  $.  3  Vss.  16-23. 

'  Vs.  9-1 S*  *  Vs.  29. 


3o8        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

qualities  and  make  him  a  pattern  and  example  to  those 
for  whom  he  was  writing;  and  he  succeeded  to  such  a 
degree  that  Duhm  declares  that  this  chapter  **  marks 
the  climax  of  Old  Testament  ethics,  surpassing  in  this 
respect,  not  only  anything  that  the  original  story  had 
to  offer,  but  the  Decalogue  and  even  the  prophets.'^ 
The  following  are  the  virtues  that  Job  is  here  represented 
as  exemplif  jdng  •/ 
'^     I.  Honesty  in  word  and  deed;  vss.  5  f. 

^j2.  Respect  for  others'  rights  and  possessions;  vss.  7  f . 

3.  Loyalty  in  the  marital  relation;  vss.  9-12. 

4.  Consideration  for  servants;  vss.  13-15. 

5.  Charity  toward  the  unfortunate;  vss.  16-20. 

6.  Scorn  of  injustice;  vss.  21-23.^ 

7.  Freedom  from  avarice;  vss.  24  f. 

8.  pevotionJto_GlKLQnJ»gh ;  vss.  26-28. 

9.  Superiority  to  resentment;  vss.  29  f. 

10.  Generosity  toward  dependents  and  strangers; 
vss.  31  f. 

11.  Courage  backed  by  a  good  conscience;  vss.  33  f. 
This  is  a  noble  array,  and  one  of  which  anyone  in  any 
age  might  be  proud.  Job  finds  so  great  comfort  in  it 
that  he  well-nigh  forgets  the  losses  and  sufferings  that 
he  has  endured.  It  gives  him  boldness,  too.  He  feels 
that,  having  searched  himself,  his  motives  and  his 
conduct,  and  found  nothing,  he  need  not  fear  the  eye 
of  the  Almighty.  Indeed,  he  is  eager  for  such  an 
examination.     He  exclaims: 

^  The  first  four  verses  are  neglected  because  they  anticipate  vss.  q- 
12  and  do  not  fit  into  the  general  scheme  of  the  chapter;  vss.  38-40, 
also,  because  they  are  apparently  an  afterthought. 

'  In  vs.  21  for  "the  fatherless"  read  "the  innocent." 


THE  BOOK  OF  JOB  309 

0  that  I  had  one  to  hear  me, 

And  the  bill  my  opponent  hath  written! 
Surely  I  would  carry  it  on  my  shoulder, 

1  would  bind  it  upon  me  like  a  crown; 
The  number  of  my  steps  would  I  declare,^ 
As  a  prince  would  I  receive  him.^ 

In  the  Book  of  Job  as  originally  written  this  challenge 
was  immediately  followed,  not  by  the  long  and  tedious 
speech  of  EUhu,  in  chaps.  32-37,  but  by  Yahweh's 
answer  *'out  of  the  whirlwind,"  which  now  begins 
with  chap.  38.  In  it  there  is  no  attempt  to  meet  Job's 
complaintby  explaining  his_suflFerings  or  the  apparent 
confusion  in  the  distribution  of  happiness  and  unhappi- 
nessinthe_worl(L  It  is  almost  entirely  devoted  to  a 
panorama  of  the  wonders  of  the  material  universe  in 
illustration  of  the  wisdom  and  the  power  of_  the  Creator 
as^  compared  with  his  human  cregtiirps.  Toward  the 
end,  however,  there  is  a  couplet  that  has  profound 
etiiical  significahcejriam£lyj  thf  Houblp  qiieritio-nj 

Wilt  thou  destroy  my  rectitude  ? 

Wilt  thou  condemn  me  for  the  sake  of  being  justified  ?" 

The  peculiar  phraseology  of  the  second  Hne  imphes 
that,  as  Job  himself  has  more  than  once  made  very 
apparent,  the  consciousness  of  his  rectitude  was  dear 
to  him  above  everything  else;  while  the  whole  couplet 
is  the  strongest  possible  expression  of  God's  jealousy 
for  his  own  righteousness. 

The  words  with  which  God  closes  must  be  read  in 
the  Hght  of  this  outburst.  God  now,  in  his  turn, 
challenges  Job,  saying: 

'  Job  31 : 35-37.  '  Job  40:8. 


3IO        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

Deck  now  thyself  with  pride  and  grandeur, 
Yea,  clothe  thyself  with  splendor  and  glory. 
Pour  out  the  fury  of  thy  anger; 
Every  one  that  is  proud  abase. 
Every  one  that  is  haughty  humble; 
And  tread  down  the  wicked  where  they  stand. 
Tread  them  in  the  dust  together; 
Their  faces  shroud  in  darkness. 
Then  will  I  also  praise  thee, 
-      When  thy  right  hand  giveth  thee  victory.' 

Job  is  deeply  impressed.  The  necessity  of  defending 
himself  against  his  officious  friends  had  given  him  an 
exaggerated  importance  in  his  own  eyes.  He  now  sees 
that  he  is  really  but  a  small  part  of  the  scheme  of  things 
to  which  he  belongs,  and  he  feels  a  new  reverence  for, 
and  confidence  in,  the  Power  that  presides  over  it. 
He  rephes,  therefore : 

I  know  that  thou  canst  do  all  things, 
And  that  nothing  is  too  difScult  for  thee. 
Therefore  have  I  declared  what  I  understood  not, 
Things  too  wonderful  for  me  to  comprehend. 
I  had  heard  of  thee  by  the  hearing  of  the  ear, 
But  now  my  eye  hath  seen  thee; 
Therefore  am  I  utterly  subdued. 
And  I  repent  in  dust  and  ashes.' 

It  remains  to  consider  the  passages  in  the  Book  of 
Job  that  are  later  than  the  original  poem,  so  far  as  they 
have  ethical  significance. 

The  first  of  these  passages  is  12:4-10,  which,  however, 
is  noticeable,  not  so  much  for  any  substantial  divergence 
from  the  rest  of  the  speech  of  which  it  is  a  part,  as  for 

'Job  40:10-14.  '  Job  42:2  f.,  5  £. 


THE  BOOK  OF  JOB  31 1 

an  exaggeration  of  the  condition  described,  for  example, 

in  the  contrasted  statements, 

A  laughing-stock  is  the  just,  the  perfect  man;' 

and 

Peaceful  are  the  tents  of  robbers, 

And  safety  have  they  that  provoke  God.' 

The  same  quality  appears  in  chap.  24,  where  the 
background  is  evidently  a  state  of  lawlessness  of  which 
the  Book  of  Job  elsewhere  gives  no  intimation.  It  is  a 
time  when 

The  wicked  remove  landmarks; 

They  seize  flocks  and  feed  them; 

They  drive  off  the  ass  of  orphans; 

They  take  the  widow's  ox  as  a  pledge; 

They  turn  the  needy  from  the  way; 

The  poor  of  the  land  all  hide  themselves.^ 

Murder  and  adultery,  also,  according  to  vss.  14-17,  are 
common.  Nor  is  this  the  only  indication  of  ungenuine- 
ness.  In  vss.  18-24  Job  is  represented  as  abandoning 
his  contention  that  the  wicked  do  not  receive  their  just 
deserts,  for  that  of  his  opponents  and  declaring  that 
Their  portion  is  cursed  in  the  land. 

It  is  clear  that,  if  this  chapter  belongs  to  the  original 
poem,  it  should  be  put  into  the  mouth,  not  of  Job,  but 
of  one  of  his  ineffectual  comforters. 

There  are  two  passages  in  chap.  31  whose  origin  is 
doubtful,  namely,  vss.  2-4  and  vss.  38-40,  because,  as 
already  noted,  the  first  has  a  peculiar  form  and  antici- 
pates vss.  9-12,  and  the  second,  unless  it  has  been  mis- 
placed, is  evidently  an  afterthought. 

^Jobi2:4.  "Job  12:6.  3job  24:2-4. 


312        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

The  speeches  of  Elihu,  chaps.  32-37,  which,  accord- 
ing to  many  of  the  best  scholars,  are  of  secondary 
origin,  teach  the  same  doctrines  as  those  of  the  three 
original  friends,  but  in  a  rather  more  developed  form. 
Elihu  follows  most  closely  Eliphaz,  who,  it  will  be 
remembered,  in  his  first  speech,'  tried  to  comfort  Job 
by  dwelling  on  the  disciplinary  value  of  suffering. 
When  one  is  suffering,  he  says. 

He  prayeth  to  God,  and  he  is  gracious  to  him, 
And  he  seeth  his  face  with  rejoicing.^ 

He  takes  occasion,  however,  to  warn  Job  that  God  is  just : 

For  the  work  of  a  man  will  he  render  to  him, 

And  cause  every  man  to  meet  what  his  ways  deserve  ;3 

and  that,  although 

He  withdraweth  not  his  eyes  from  the  righteous,^ 

and  pardons  and  restores  to  favor  those  who  submit 
and  promise  amendment,^ 

If  they  hearken  not,  they  pass  into  Sheol, 
And  die  without  knowledge.^ 

It  is  not  necessary  to  dwell  at  greater  length  on 
these  passages,  since  it  is  clear  from  what  has  already 
been  said  with  reference  to  them  that  their  author  or 
authors  sympathized  with  Job's  critics;  in  other  words, 
he  or  they  entirely  missed  the  lesson  that  the  original 
author  wished  to  teach. 

^Jobs:i7ff.  3job34:ii.  5job34:32. 

'Job  33:26.  *  Job  36:7.  ^  Job  36:12. 


CHAPTER  XXVI 

THE  BOOKS  OF  JOEL  AND  JONAH 

I.     JOEL 

The  Book  of  Joel  registers  the  limit  of  development 
in  the  direction  of  national  particularism.  There  is  not 
the  slighest  tendency  on  the  part  of  the  author  to  find 
fault  with  the  moral  condition  of  his  people,  even  in 
the  face  of  the  plague  of  locusts  and  the  devastation 
wrought  by  them,  as  described  in  the  first  two  chapters. 
The  nearest  approach  to  criticism  is  found  in  1:5, 
where,  according  to  the  English  Version,  he  calls  on 
the  "drunkards"  to  weep  over  the  calamity  that  has 
befallen  the  land.  In  this  case,  however,  the  word 
rendered  "drunkards,"  as  appears  from  the  parallel 
expression  "drinkers  of  wine,"  means  those  who  are 
fond  of  wine  and  therefore  especially  interested  in  the 
prospect  of  a  vintage,  just  as  the  priests,  who  appear  in 
vss.  9  f.,  are  interested,  not  only  in  this,  but  in  the  other 
crops.  They  mourn  because  "the  grain  is  destroyed, 
the  must  is  dried  up  (ashamed),  the  oil  languisheth."^ 

The  writer,  having  no  fault  to  find  with  his  people, 
does  not  seek  the  cause  of  the  visitation,  as  an  older 
prophet  would  have  done,  in  their  disloyalty  to  Yahweh, 
or  their  unfaithfulness  to  one  another;  but,  accepting 
it  as  inexpHcable,  calls  for  a  fast  and  a  solemn  festival^ 
and  a  unanimous  appeal  to  Yahweh  for  assistance,  in 
the  hope  that,  since  "he  is  gracious  and  merciful,  slow 

^Isa.  24:7.  'Joel  1:14. 

313 


314        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

to  anger,  and  abundant  in  kindness,  and  repenteth  of 
evil,  perhaps  (who  knoweth)  he  will  turn  and  repent 
and  leave  a  blessing  behind  him,  even  a  meal  offering 
and  a  drink  offering,"  for  his  own  service.'  His  faith 
grows  as  he  proceeds,  until  he  is  prepared  to  predict, 
not  only  that  Yahweh  will  put  an  end  to  the  present 
distress  and  never  again  put  his  people  to  shame,*  but 
will  pour  his  spirit  upon  them  in  such  measure  that 
even  their  slaves,  male  and  female,  because  they  belong 
to  Jews,  will  share  the  blessing.^ 

The  day  that  witnesses  this  great  miracle,  however, 
will  be  a  calamitous  one  for  all  but  the  Jews  and  their 
dependents;  for  at  that  time  Yahweh  "will  gather  all 
nations  ....  into  the  valley  of  Jehoshaphat''  and 
''inflict  judgment  upon  them."  Thus  will  he  avenge 
the  injuries  done  to  his  people  by  the  other  nations.'* 
Thereafter  ''Jerusalem  will  be  holy;  no  stranger  (except 
as  a  slave)  will  pass  through  it  any  more."s  This  is 
Judaism  at  its  narrowest — and  barrenest. 

2.      JONAH 

The  Book  of  Jonah  is  the  antidote  for  that  of  Joel. 
/      The  central  figure  is  a  typical  Jew  of  the  fifth  century 
/        B.C.,  narrow  and  exclusive,  proud  of  his  own  race,  but 
"devoid  of  sympathy  for  any  other.     So  cruel  is  he  in 
his  exclusiveness  that  he  refuses  to  carry  a  warning  to 
the  inhabitants  of  Nineveh  and  thus  make  it  possible 
for  them  to  escape  threatened  destruction.    The  excuse 
he  finally  gives  is  a  classic  example  of  rehgious  con- 
ceit,^ for  no  one  not  convinced  of  his  own  impeccability 


'  Joel  2 :  13  f. 

3  Joel  2 :  28  fif. 

s  Joel  3:17. 

»  Joel  2 :  23  ff . 

4  Joel  3:4  (Gr.),  19,  21. 

^  Jonah  4:2. 

THE  BOOKS  OF  JOEL  AND  JONAH  315 

would  insist  upon  unmitigated  justice  for  all  offenders. 
The  doctrine  of  the  author,  on  the  other  hand,  is  by  no 
means  sentimentalism.  God  does  not  withdraw  his 
decree  until  the  people  of  Nineveh,  from  the  least  to 
the  greatest,  have  not  only  assumed  the  garb  and  posture 
of  penitents  but,  in  response  to  a  royal  proclamation, 
turned  "every  one  from  his  evil  way,  and  from  the 
violence  that  is  in  his  hands."^  But,  when  he  *'saw 
their  works,"  he  "repented  of  the  evil  that  he  said 
he  would  do  to  them,  and  did  it  not."^  Finally  he 
rebukes  the  blind  cruelty  of  his  messenger,  because, 
although  he  cannot  endure  the  slightest  personal 
inconvenience,  he  is  perfectly  willing  to  witness  the 
destruction  of  a  "great  city,  wherein  are  more  than 
sixscore  thousand  persons  that  cannot  discern  between 
their  right  hands  and  their  left  hands,  and  also  many 
cattle."^ 

The  book  is  evidently  a  protest  against  the  formality 
and  exclusiveness  that  took  possession  of  the  mass  of 
the  Jews  after  the  adoption  of  the  Priestly  legislation; 
and  it  must  have  had  its  effect,  for  it  teaches  clearly, 
not  only  that  morality  is  an  essential  element  in  religion, 
but  that  "God  is  no  respecter  of  persons,  but  in  every 
nation  he  that  feareth  him  and  worketh  righteousness 
is  acceptable  to  him.""*  These  lessons  have  always  been 
largely  overlooked,  because  the  readers  of  the  book 
have  too  often  been  of  the  same  narrow  type  as  the 
principal  character. 

^  Jonah  3:8.  3  Jonah  4:11. 

*  Jonah  3:10.  *  Acts  10 :  34  f . 


CHAPTER  XXVII 

THE  BOOK  OF  PROVERBS 

The  Book  of  Proverbs,  as  already  explained,  is  of 
composite  origin,  the  component  parts  being  the 
Prologue,  chaps.  1-9,  the  main  collections,  10:1 — 22:16 
and  25:1 — 29:27,  and  the  supplementary  sections, 
22:17—24:22;  24:23-34;  30:1-33;  31:1-9;  and  31:10- 
31.  The  various  divisions  of  the  book,  however,  have 
so  much  in  common  that  it  is  not  necessary  to  discuss 
them  separately  in  this  connection. 

The  key  to  the  book  and  its  several  parts,  as  4:7 
leads  one  to  expect,  is  '^wisdom."  It  is  throughout 
emphatically  *'the  principal  thing."  Indeed,  one  may 
say  that  it  is  the  one  thing  "needful,"  since  it  implies 
or  involves  everything  the  contributors  to  the  book 
thought  admirable,  and  secures  to  its  possessor  every- 
thing that  they  deemed  most  worthy  of  pursuit  or 
attainment. 

In  the  first  place,  the  wisdom  of  the  Proverbs  has  a 
religious  connotation.  This  is  clear  from  the  start, 
the  title  being  immediately  followed  by  the  statement, 
as  a  motto,  that 

The  fear  of  Yahweh  is  the  beginning  of  knowledge/ 

the  first  thing  to  be  learned  by  one  who  wishes  to  be, 
and  to  be  esteemed,  wise.  The  fear  of  Yahweh,  how- 
ever, here  means,  not  mere  dread  of  the  Almighty,  but 
a  humble  recognition  of  his  authority  and  a  cheerful 

■  Prov.  1 : 7. 

316 


THE  BOOK  OF  PROVERBS  317 

readiness  to  do  his  will  so  far  as  it  can  be  ascertained  by 
human  endeavor.  Lest  the  reader  forget  the  impor- 
tance of  this  principle,  it  is  repeated  in  9:10,  where  it 
takes  the  expanded  form  of 

The  fear  of  Yahweh  is  the  beginning  of  wisdom, 
And  knowledge  of  the  Holy  One  is  understanding. 

Both  passages  are  based  on  15:33, 

The  fear  of  Yahweh  is  the  instruction  of  wisdom, 
And  before  honor  is  humility. 

The  author  of  the  last  passage  was  familiar  with  the 
religious  observances  of  his  people,  and,  Uke  him  of  the 
Prologue,'  doubtless  appreciated  their  significance; 
but  he  was  also  acquainted  with  the  prophets  and 
thoroughly  in  sympathy  with  those  who  insisted  that 
Yahweh  was  a  moral  being  and  that,  therefore,  religion 
without  morality  was  an  intolerable  contradiction.  He 
expresses  himself  to  this  effect  in  21:3,  which  reads, 

To  do  righteousness  and  justice  9^ 

Is  more  acceptable  to  Yahweh  than  sacrifice; 

and  more  strongly  in  vs.  27  of  the  same  chapter,  where 
he  declares, 

The  sacrifice  of  the  wicked  is  an  abomination, 

How  much  more  when  he  bringeth  it  with  a  wicked  heart.' 

It  is  not  strange,  therefore,  that  in  1:2  ff.,  where  the 
-purpose  of  the  compiler  is  stated  in  detail,  he  says  it  is 
to  enable  the  reader 

To  gain  wisdom  and  training, 
To  understand  instructive  words, 
To  get  training  in  wise  conduct. 
Righteousness,  and  justice,  and  equity; 

*  Prov.  3:9.  *  See  also  Prov.  15:8. 


3i8        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

and  that  in  8: 13  wisdom  personified  is  made  to  say, 

Pride,  and  arrogance,  and  an  evil  way, 
And  a  perverse  mouth  I  hate; 

or  that  the  book  is  largely  composed  of  moral  precepts, 
waymarks  for  a  virtuous  and  successful  life.  They  are 
mostly  thrown  together  without  regard  to  any  relation 
to  one  another,  but  there  are  some  instances  in  the 
later  portions  of  the  book  in  which  some  of  the  more 
odious  evils  of  the  period  are  grouped  for  condemnation, 
the  most  notable  example  being  6:16-19,  where  there 
are  enumerated  seven  things  especially  abominable  to 
Yahweh,  namely,  (i)  haughty  eyes;  (2)  a  lying  tongue; 
(3)  hands  that  shed  innocent  blood;  (4)  a  heart  that 
deviseth  wicked  schemes;  (5)  feet  that  make  haste  to 
do  harm;  (6)  a  false  witness  that  uttereth  lies;  and 
(7)  one  that  soweth  discord  among  brethren. 

This  index  prohibitorius  can  hardly  be  called  com- 
plete, but  the  banishment  of  the  offenses  here  enimierated 
would  doubtless  greatly  improve  the  moral  condition 
of  any  community. 

In  the  introductory  passage  already  cited  the  purpose 
of  the  collector  was,  not  only  to  impart  instruction  in 
"righteousness,  and  justice,  and  equity,"  but  also 

To  give  prudence  to  the  simple, 

To  the  yotmg  man  knowledge  and  discretion.' 

In  other  words,  the  wisdom  of  the  book  includes  training 
in  the  art  of  so  adapting  one's  self  and  one's  ideas,  powers, 
and  resources  to  one's  environment,  as  most  surely 
and  readily  to  attain  the  end  or  ends  that  one  holds 
most  desirable.  Many  of  its  precepts,  therefore,  are 
simply  the  dicta  of  common  prudence  with  reference 

''Prov.  1:4. 


THE  BOOK  OF  PROVERBS  319 

to  everyday  ajffairs.  Among  the  acquirements  recom-  y 
mended  are  prudence  in  the  narrower  sense,'  discretion,* 
dehberation,^  caution,"*  efficiency,  especially  in  women,^ 
diligence,^  contentment,^  reticence,^  cheerfulness,^  and 
affability .'°  All  these,  in  so  far  as  one  possesses  them, 
help  one  to  success  in  life,  if — and  this  is  the  test  of 
their  relative  values  and  importance — at  the  same  time 
one  fears  God  and  works  righteousness.  Otherwise  they 
can  only  delay  to  some  extent  the  failure  and  ruin  that 
result  from  the  neglect  of  the  moral  and  reHgious  ele- 
ments of  character."  Those  who  thus  make  shipwreck 
of  their  lives,  in  contrast  with  the  wise,  are  called  "the 
simple,"  also  "scoffers,"  but  most  frequently  "fools.""      X 

This  brief  sketch  will,  perhaps,  suffice  to  indicate 
the  general  character  of  the  Book  of  Proverbs  and  the 
relation  of  the  ethical  element  to  its  remaining  content. 
It  is  now  necessary  to  consider  more  at  length  its  purely 
ethical  teaching  and  the  ethical  status  that  its  teaching 
presupposes. 

In  the  first  place,  although  in  this  book  moral 
perfection  is  not  so  directly  ascribed  to  Yahweh  as  in 
some  others,  the  reader  is  never  allowed  to  forget  that 
the  world  was  brought  into  being  and  is  governed  by 
"a  power  that  makes  for  righteousness."  Thus  in  15:3 
it  is  asserted  that 

The  eyes  of  Yahweh  are  everywhere, 
Keeping  watch  upon  the  evil  and  the  good; 

'Prov.  13:16;  24:27;  etc.  'Prov.  14:30;  23:4!.;  etc. 

»Prov.  11:22;  15:23;  etc.  *Prov.  12:23;  i7:27f.;  etc. 

3  Prov.  15:22;  19:2;  etc.  'Prov.  15:13;  17:22;  etc. 

4Prov.  14:6;  28:14;  etc.  ^•'Prov.  15:1;  16:24;  etc. 

sProv.  14:1;  3i:ioff.;  etc.  "Prov.  5:3;  11:18;  17:28;  etc. 

^ Prov.  6:6-11;   12:24;  etc.  "Prov.  1:22. 


320        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

and  elsewhere  he  is  described  as  not  only  concerned 
about  the  ethical  condition  of  his  creatures,  but  able 
to  discern  whether  they  are  good  or  evil: 

All  the  ways  of  a  man  are  dean  in  his  own  eyes, 
But  Yahweh  weigheth  the  spirits.' 

He  does  his  work  thoroughly: 

The  fining-pot  is  for  silver  and  the  furnace  for  gold; 
But  Yahweh  is  a  tester  of  hearts.' 

He  has  so  made  man  that  the  offender  himself  becomes 
his  own  accuser,  for 

The  spirit  of  man  is  the  lamp  of  God, 
Searching  all  the  chambers  of  the  soul.^ 

If  he  is  disposed  to  defend  himself,  he  is  met  with  the 
reminder, 

Doth  not  he  that  weigheth  hearts  perceive  ? 
And  doth  not  he  that  watcheth  thy  soul  know  ? 

and  the  warning, 

Yea,  he  will  requite  men  according  as  they  act.* 

There  are  two  general  classes,  the  righteous  and  the 
wicked,  and  his  attitude  toward  them  respectively  re- 
flects his  own  moral  character.  The  following  are  some 
of  the  ways  in  which  it  is  described : 

The  curse  of  Yahweh  is  on  the  house  of  the  wicked, 
But  he  blesseth  the  abode  of  the  righteous.* 

Yahweh  will  not  suffer  the  soul  of  the  righteous  to  perish, 
But  the  desire  of  the  wicked  he  rejecteth.^ 

*Prov.  16:2;  21:2.  <Prov.  24:12. 

»  Prov.  17:3.  »  Prov.  3 :  33. 

3  Prov.  20:27.  '  Prov.  10:3. 


THE  BOOK  OF  PROVERBS  321 

The  fear  of  Yahweh  prolongeth  days, 

But  the  years  of  the  wicked  shall  be  shortened.* 

The  perverse  in  heart  are  an  abomination  to  Yahweh, 
But  the  perfect  in  their  way  are  his  delight.* 

A  stronghold  is  Yahweh  to  a  man  of  integrity, 
But  destruction  to  workers  of  iniquity.^ 

The  way  of  the  wicked  is  an  abomination  to  Yahweh, 
But  he  loveth  him  that  pursueth  righteousness.'' 

A  good  man  will  obtain  favor  of  Yahweh, 
But  a  man  of  wicked  devices  will  he  condemn.* 

Yahweh  is  far  from  the  wicked. 

But  he  heareth  the  prayer  of  the  righteous.* 

He  cannot  tolerate  any  other  attitude  among  men. 

Says  17:15, 

He  that  acquitteth  the  wicked  and  he  that  con- 

demneth  the  righteous 
Are  both  an  abomination  to  Yahweh. 

These  are  the  passages  in  which  Yahweh  is  brought 
into  express  relations  with  the  classes  named.  There 
are  others  in  which  the  harmony  of  the  righteous,  and 
the  dissonance  of  the  wicked,  with  the  world  is  quite 
as  clearly  taught,  but  without  tracing  the  result  in 
either  case  directly  to  the  Creator.  Such  are  2:21  f.; 
4:18  f.;  10:2,  6,  7,  9,  16,  24,  25,  28,  30;  11:3,  4,7  6,  8, 
10,  18,  19,  21,  27,  31;  12:3,  7,  13,  21;  13:2,6,9, 
21,   22,  25;    14:11,  14,  i9>  32,*  34;    15:6;    21:12,  18; 

*  Prov.  10:27.  '  Prov.  10:29.  *  Prov.  12:2. 

»  Prov.  11:20.  ^  Prov.  15:9.  *  Prov.  15:29. 

7  Read  "In  a  man's  integrity  is  his  hope,"  etc. 
'In  the  Greek  like  11:7,  emended. 


322        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

24:16;  28:18;  29:6,  16.  To  these  must  be  added  the 
passages  in  which  the  righteous  or  the  wicked  alone 
are  mentioned.  In  some  of  them'  Yahweh  personally 
rewards  or  punishes,  while  in  others  the  impersonal  form 
is  employed.^ 

The  passages  cited  being  all  of  a  general  character, 
the  rewards  promised  and  the  penalties  threatened  are 
naturally  correspondingly  indefinite. ^  There  are,  how- 
ever, instances  in  which  certain  forms  of  good  are 
specified:  the  favor  of  Yahweh,"*  wealth,^  long  Hfe,^ 
relief  from  trouble  and  d anger, ^  comfort  and  happiness,^ 
and  praise  and  honor  .^ 

It  will  have  been  noted  that  all  the  rewards  mentioned 
are  individual  and,  so  far  as  they  are  definite,  temporal." 
One  of  the  passages  cited  teaches  in  so  many  words  that 

The  righteous  shall  be  recompensed  in  the  earth, 
How  much  more  the  wicked  and  the  sinner;" 

and  the  disciple  is  warned  not  to  give  place  to  doubt  on 
the  subject: 

Let  not  thy  heart  envy  sinners, 
But  fear  thou  Yahweh  always; 
For  there  is  a  reward  for  thee, 
And  thy  hope  shall  not  fail;" 

^Prov.  2:7f.;  3:8;  16:4;  19:23;  isiiji. 

'Prov.  11:7;  12:28;  20:7;  21:21;  22:8;  24:19!. 

sProv.  3:33;   10:6;  etc.  *  Prov.  2:21;  10:27;  ^^'^9*  etc. 

<Prov.  12:2;  15:9;  etc.  7Prov.  11:5,  8;  12:21;  etc. 

sProv.  13:22;  15:6;  etc.         *Prov.  3:8;  13:9;  etc. 

'Prov.  14:19;   21:21;  etc. 
*<»  On  Prov.  11:7  and  14:32,  see  p.  321. 
"  Prov.  11:31. 
"  Prov.  23: 17  f. 


THE  BOOK  OF  PROVERBS  323 

and 

Fret  not  thyself  because  of  evil-doers, 
Neither  envy  thou  the  wicked; 
For  there  is  no  reward  for  the  bad  man, 
The  light  of  the  wicked  shall  go  out.^ 

At  first  sight  the  absence  of  criticism  or  apology  on 
this  important  subject  seems  to  indicate  that  the  book, 
if  it  was  not  written  by  Solomon,  belongs  to  a  com- 
paratively early  period  in  the  history  of  the  Hebrews. 
There  is,  however,  another  and,  in  view  of  all  the  facts, 
a  more  plausible  explanation.  The  book  is  not  a  col- 
lection of  popular  saws,  but  a  studied  Uterary  product 
in  aphoristic  form  intended  for  popular  instruction. 
Now,  the  form  chosen,  in  its  very  nature,  permits 
only  rather  superficial  generalizations,  and  it  is  often 
better,  as  the  authors  of  these  proverbs  surely  were  wise 
enough  to  know,  in  dealing  with  simple  people  to  give 
the  rule,  in  the  first  instance,  without  the  exceptions. 
From  this  point  of  view  the  doctrine  in  question  loses 
its  significance  as  an  indication  of  the  age  of  the  book 
or  any  part  of  it. 

There  is  another  point  with  reference  to  the  rewards 
offered  in  the  Proverbs  that  deserves  attention.  In  the 
passages  cited,  as  has  been  shown,  they  are  of  several 
kinds.  Thus  far  nothing  has  been  adduced  to  show 
that  the  Jewish  sages  did  not  rate  them  all  of  equal 
value.  This,  however,  is  not  the  case.  They  made 
distinctions.  Thus,  although  they  two  or  three  times 
present  material  wealth  as  a  blessing,  elsewhere  in  the 
book  they  directly  or  indirectly  teach  that  it  is  by 
no  means  of  the  greatest  importance.     A  hint  to  this 

*  Prov.  24:19  f.    See  also  3:31;  24:1. 


324        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

effect  is  found  in  the  encomium  on  wisdom,  which,  as 
has  been  explained,  includes  righteousness: 

Happy  the  man  that  findeth  wisdom, 

And  the  man  that  getteth  understanding: 

For  the  gain  thereof  is  richer  than  silver, 

And  the  income  therefrom  than  gold. 

It  is  more  precious  than  coral,  . 

And  no  treasures  compare  with  it. 

Length  of  days  is  in  its  right  hand, 

In  its  left  hand  are  riches  and  honor. 

Its  ways  are  pleasant  ways, 

And  all  its  paths  peaceful. 

It  is  a  tree  of  life  to  them  that  lay  hold  thereof, 

Yea,  happy  are  they  that  hold  it  fast.^ 

Here  belong  also  certain  passages  in  which  wealth  is 
compared  with  other  recognized  goods;  for  example, 

Better  is  a  little,  with  the  fear  of  Yahweh, 
Than  great  treasure  and  trouble  therewith;' 

A  good  name  is  rather  to  be  chosen  than  great  wealth, 
Approval  than  silver  and  gold;3 

Better  is  a  little,  with  righteousness. 

Than  an  abundant  revenue  without  justice.* 

Be  it  observed  that,  in  all  these  passages,  the  sages, 
unlike  Job's  friends,  admit  the  possibiHty  of  exceptions 
to  the  traditional  doctrine  of  retribution;  or,  perhaps, 
treat  the  poverty  of  the  wise  and  righteous  as  only  a 
temporary  or  probational  condition.  See  3:11  f.,  where 
the  disciplinary  view  of  the  suffering  of  the  righteous 
is  distinctly  stated.     Cf.  Toy. 

»Prov.  3:135.    See  also  8:10  f.,  18  f.;   16:16. 
»Prov.  15:16.  sProv.  22:1. 

<Prov.  16:8.     See  also  15:17;  16:19;  19:1  (28:6),  22;  28:11. 


THE  BOOK  OF  PROVERBS  325 

The  starting-point  for  a  detailed  examination  of  the 
ethical  field  covered  by  the  Book  of  Proverbs  is  deter- 
ed  by  the  prominence  given  to  wisdom.  Wisdom 
in  man  is  an  acquirement.  It  sometimes  costs  long 
and  painful  effort.  Its  foundation  is  laid  in  the  fear  of^ 
^  Vfll^^fh.  But  the  fear  of  Yahweh  is  a  form  of  humility. 
It  is  not  strange,  therefore,  that  humility  in  its  various 
manifestations  is  strongly  commended  and  its  opposites 
as  vigorously  condemned.  The  good  man  is  one  who 
not  only  fears  Yahweh,  but  takes  the  docile  attitude 
toward  all  who  can  help  him  to  lead  a  successful  life. 
The  unseen  monitor  who  calls  herself  Wisdom  has  his 
constant  attention.    She  says  to  him: 

Hear  instruction,  and  become  wise, 

And  reject  it  not. 

Happy  the  man  that  listeneth  to  me, 

Watching  always  at  my  gate. 

Waiting  at  the  posts  of  my  doors. 

For  whoso  findeth  me  findeth  life, 

And  obtaineth  favor  from  Yahweh; 

But  he  that  misseth  me  wrongeth  himself; 

All  that  hate  me  love  death.^ 

He  listens  also  to  the  sages,  those  who  have  given 
special  thought  to  the  problems  of  life,  and  whose 
vocation  it  is  to  teach  their  fellows  how  to  get  the  most 
out  of  existence.'*  He  is  submissive  to  the  constituted 
authorities,^  and  particularly  respectful  toward  his 
natural  instructors,  his  father  and  mother.^  Indeed, 
he  gladly  takes  counsel  with  any  who  are  willing  to 

'Prov.  8:335. 

»Prov.  2:iff.;  18:15;  19:20,  etc. 

3  Prov.  10 : 8.  *  Prov.  1:8;  13 :  i,  etc. 


326        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

advise  him/  and  being  never  too  old  to  learn,=^  welcomes 
even  reproof  from  those  who  are  competent  to  administer 
it.^  He  carries  the  same  spirit  into  all  his  relations  with 
men,  being  more  anxious  to  deserve  honor  than  to  obtain 
it.^  On  the  folly  of  conceit,  see  12:15;  26:12,  etc.; 
on  indociHty,  12:1;  13:18,  etc.  Pride,  which,  it  will 
be  remembered,  is  one  of  the  seven  things  that  ^' Yahweh 
hateth,"^  is  repeatedly  denounced  as  not  only  intoler- 
able but  exceedingly  dangerous.^  The  humility  of  the 
Proverbs  is  a  noble  and  admirable  quality,  as  Jesus 
testified  when  he  borrowed  from  25:6f.  the  substance 
of  the  rebuke  he  administered  to  the  scribes  and  pharisees 
for  crowding  into  the  best  seats  at  a  feast  to  which  he 
was  invited. 

The  sages  of  this  book  also  emphasized  the  impor- 
tance of  self-control.  A  choleric  man,  they  urge,  is  in 
constant  danger,  not  only  of  saying  or  doing  things 
prejudicial  to  his  own  interests,  but  of  provoking 
others  to  wicked  speech  or  action.    As  29: 22  puts  it, 

An  irascible  man  stirreth  up  strife, 

And  a  passionate  man  is  a  great  transgressor.' 

He  that  is  slow  to  anger,  on  the  other  hand,  not  only 
holds  himself  in  check,^  but  prevents  the  strife  that  he 
might  easily  have  excited.^  The  practice  of  such  self- 
control  is  sometimes  very  difficult,  but  even  then 

»Prov.  12:15;   15:22, etc.  4Prov.  15:33;   25:6f.,etc. 

»Prov.  1:5.  sProv.  6:i6ff. 

3  Prov.  12:1;   17:10,  etc. 

oprov.  8:13;  11:2;  15:25;  16:5,18,19;  21:4,24;  29:23;  30:13. 

V  See  also  Prov.  19:19;  22:2^i.\   27:4. 

*  Prov.  29:15.  'Prov.  15:18. 


THE  BOOK  OF  PROVERBS  327 

It  is  wisdom  in  a  man  to  be  slow  to  anger, 
And  his  glory  to  overlook  transgression.^ 

Indeed,  according  to  16:32,  such  cases  offer  the  best  of 
opportunities  for  the  display  of  moral  character,  since 

He  that  is  slow  to  anger  is  better  than  a  warrior, 

And  he  that  ruleth  his  spirit  than  he  that  taketh  a  city. 

It  is  easy  to  see  that  any  person  or  class  of  persons 
who  so  highly  extolled  self-control  would  naturally  give 
temperance  in  all  things  an  important  place  in  personal 
ethics.  The  truth  is  that  in  the  book  of  Proverbs  is 
found  the  most  dehberate  and  effective  protest  against 
the  dominance  of  appetite  there  is  in  the  Old  Testament. 
The  first  passage  to  be  quoted  should  be  2  5 : 1 6 .     It  reads, 

Hast  thou  found  honey?  eat  but  enough  for  thee; 
Lest  thou  be  sated  therewith  and  vomit  it  up; 

which,  of  course,  means  that  anything,  however  good, 
if  abused,  becomes  distasteful  or  even  injurious. 

This  principle  is  appHed  to  both  eating  and  drinking 
in  21:17,  where  the  disciple  is  warned  that 

He  that  loveth  pleasure  will  come  to  want. 
And  he  that  loveth  wine  and  oil  will  not  be  rich; 

and  in  23 :  20  f .,  where  it  is  expanded  into 

Be  not  among  winebibbers, 

Among  gluttonous  eaters  of  flesh; 

For  the  drunkard  and  the  glutton  come  to  poverty 

And  sleepiness  clotheth  with  rags. 

Finally,  in  23 :  29  ff .  the  drunkard  is  depicted  with  such 
vivid  reaHsm  as  powerfully  to  reinforce  the  accompany- 
ing declaration  concerning  wine,  that 

At  the  last  it  biteth  like  a  serpent, 
And  stingeth  like  an  adder; 

'  Prov.  19:  II.    See  also  14: 17  (Toy). 


328        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

and  influence  the  thoughtful  to  avoid  at  least  the  abuse 
of  it.  ''The  abuse  of  it/'  be  it  observed;  for,  strongly 
as  the  Proverbs  condemn  excess,  they  do  not  require 
anyone  who  is  not  a  slave  to  his  appetite  to  abstain 
entirely  from  the  use  of  intoxicants.  This  is  clear  from 
3:10,  where  an  abundant  yield  of  wine  is  one  of  the 
rewards  promised  those  who  obey  the  injunction  to 
honor  Yahweh  with  "their  substance"  and  ''the  first 
fruits  of  all  their  increase";  and  additionally  so  from 
3i:4JBf.,  where,  although  kings  and  princes  are  warned 
against  them. 

Lest  they  drink  and  forget  the  Law, 

And  pervert  the  justice  due  all  the  afficted, 

the  author  recommends  their  use  in  certain  cases,  saying. 

Give  strong  drink  to  him  that  is  ready  to  perish. 
And  wine  to  him  that  is  in  bitter  distress; 
Let  him  drink  and  forget  his  poverty, 
And  remember  his  trouble  no  more.' 

These  citations  indicate  that  in  the  period  to  which 
the  Proverbs  belong  intemperance  was  a  serious  evil. 
There  was  another,  sexual  hcense,  which  was  even  more 
degrading,  and  which,  doubtless  owing  in  part  to  its 
prevalence  and  in  part  to  a  reaction  against  it,  receives 
more  attention  in  the  Proverbs  than  in  any  other  book 
of  the  Old  Testament.  It  seems  to  have  taken  three 
forms,  two  of  which  may  be  noticed  in  this  connection. 
The  first  is  incontinence,  if,  as  seems  probable,  in  31:3 
the  women  are  the  wives  and  concubines  of  the  king 
addressed.  The  second  is  fornication  or  the  patron- 
age of  the  professional  prostitutes  whose  existence  in 
Palestine  can  be  traced  to  the  earliest  times.    In  this 

»  See  also  Prov.  9 : 5. 


THE  BOOK  OF  PROVERBS  329 

book  they  are  mentioned  but  three  times/  and  then 
only  in  connection  with  a  class  of  married  women  who 
are  represented  as  much  more  offensive  and  dangerous 
to  the  community.  See  especially  6:26.  The  former, 
however,  in  23:27  are  compared  to  "a  deep  pit,"  that 
is,  a  pitfall  for  unwary  feet. 

When  one  inquires  concerning  the  teaching  of  the 
Proverbs  on  the  ethics  of  the  family,  one  finds  in  them  a 
new  appreciation  of  women.  Not  that  they  are  repre- 
sented as  all  alike  admirable.  The  most  common  fault 
found  in  them  seems  to  have  been  a  disposition  to 
quarrel  and  complain.'  There  were  some,  too,  and 
these  among  the  fairest,  whose  beauty  was 

Like  a  gold  ring  in  a  swine's  snout, 

so  lacking  were  they  in  sense  ;^  but  the  judgment  of  the 
sages  is,  on  the  whole,  much  more  favorable  to  the  sex 
than  that  of  earUer  writers.  There  is  a  handsome 
compHment  paid  them,  if  the  text  is  correct,  in  11:16. 

It  reads, 

A  gracious  woman  obtaineth  honor, 
And  violent  men  obtain  riches; 

which  seems  to  mean  that  a  woman  with  gentle  manners 
is  as  sure  to  win  esteem  as  an  unprincipled  man  by 
violent  methods  to  secure  wealth,  the  object  of  his 
ambition.  This,  however,  was  perhaps  not  intended 
to  be  more  flattering  than  14:  i,  where  there  is  attributed 
to  woman  a  capacity  for  wisdom,  or  3i:ioff.,  where 
the  ideal  woman  is  described  in  the  multipHcity  of  her 
domestic  activities.  She  has  hands  deft  in  household 
arts,  a  mind  alert  and  practical  for  business,  and  a 

^Prov.6:26;  7:10;  23:27.  sProv.  11:22, 

»Prov.  19:13;  21:9,19;  27:15. 


330        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

heart  abounding  in  good-will  toward  all  who  have 
occasion  to  test  its  goodness.  Such  a  woman,  says 
31:10,  has  a  value  "above  corals.''  It  is  not  strange, 
therefore,  that,  in  18:22,  where  an  adjective  is  to  be 
suppHed  or  understood,  it  should  be  said  that 

He  that  hath  found  a  [good]  wife  hath  found  a  blessing, 
And  hath  obtained  favor  from  Yahweh; 

or,  as  19:14  puts  it. 

Houses  and  riches  are  an  inheritance  from  fathers, 
But  a  capable  wife  is  from  Yahweh.^ 

One  should  not,  of  course,  read  too  much  into  these 
proverbs,  but  they  surely  indicate  that  to  the  sage  or 
sages  with  whom  they  originated,  marriage  was  not  a 
wholly  commercial  transaction.  There  is  other  evidence 
pointing  in  the  same  direction.  In  2:17  the  husband  is 
called  the  "friend"  of  the  wife's  youth,  and  the  wife 
who  has  proved  false  to  her  husband  is  charged  with 
having  forgotten  "a  covenant,"  not  merely  with  him, 
but  "with  God."  See  also  12:4,  where  the  capable 
wife  is  described  as  "a  crown  to  her  husband,"  and 
31:23,  where  she  is  credited  with  enhancing  his  dignity 
and  reputation  among  his  townsmen.  Finally,  note 
that  in  vs.  31  of  the  same  chapter  the  book  closes  with 
a  demand  that  she  be  given  credit  for  her  abiHty  and 
pubhcly  commended  for  her  individual  attainments. 

The  recognition  of  the  wife  as  a  gift  of  Yahweh  would 
naturally  have  important  consequences.  It  would  bring 
a  wedded  pair  closer  together,  and  the  more  closely  they 
were  united  the  less  the  husband  would  be  incUned, 
even  under  favoring  circumstances,  to  take  a  rival  to  his 

» Qi,  Prov.  12:4;  14:1. 


THE  BOOK  OF  PROVERBS  331 

first  wife  into  the  family.  At  any  rate,  in  this  book, 
unless,  as  has  been  suggested,  31:3  is  an  exception, 
marriage  seems  to  mean  the  union  of  one  man  with  one 
woman  to  the  end  of  their  common  lives.  See  5 :  18,  but 
especially  31 :  29,  where  the  fortunate  husband  of  the  ideal 
wife  is  made  to  say, 

Many  women  have  done  worthily, 
But  thou  hast  outdone  them  all. 

The  idea  of  marriage  taught  in  the  above  passages 
was  not  universally  accepted  when  they  were  written. 
Indeed,  there  is  reason  to  believe  that  at  that  time  dis- 
loyalty to  nuptial  duties  was  alarmingly  prevalent. 
The  chief  offenders  were  a  class  of  women,  already 
mentioned,  who,  although  they  were  married,  more  or 
less  openly  practiced  harlotry.  One  meets  them  for  the 
first  time  in  2:16  ff.,  where  the  collective  name  applied 
to  them  is  "the  strange  woman."  It  is  not  clear  just 
how  the  name  is  to  be  explained :  whether  these  women 
were  actually  all  foreigners,  or  were  so  called  because 
the  earliest  harlots  known  to  the  Hebrews  were  foreigners 
and  in  process  of  time  the  name  was  applied  to  all 
women,  without  regard  to  nationality,  who  led  a  wanton 
Hfe;  but  the  latter  is  the  more  probable  theory.  That 
they  were  married  is  clear  from  2:17,  6:29,  and  7:19, 
where  the  husband  in  each  case  is  mentioned.  It  is 
not  necessary  to  quote  the  extended  passages  where 
the  arts  by  which  they  decoyed,  and  the  fate  to  which 
they  allured,  their  victims  are  described.  It  will 
suffice  to  cite  6:26,  where  these  harpies  are  compared 
with  the  ordinary  harlots: 

The  price  of  a  harlot  is  a  loaf  of  bread, 
But  the  adulteress  hunts  the  precious  life; 


332        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

and  the  warning  in  7 :  25  ff . : 

Let  not  thy  heart  turn  aside  to  her  ways, 

Stray  not  into  her  paths; 

For  many  are  the  dead  that  she  hath  brought  low. 

And  very  numerous  her  slain. 

Her  house  is  on  the  roads  to  Sheol, 

The  descents  to  the  chambers  of  death.' 

There  are  various  proverbs  concerning  children  and 
the  relation  between  them  and  their  parents.  Here,  as 
elsewhere  in  the  Old  Testament,  children  are  required 
to  honor  their  fathers  and  mothers,  and  those  who  act 
otherwise  are  threatened  with  the  direst  consequences.* 

It  is  taken  for  granted  that  the  normal  child  will 
wish  to  please  his  parents,  and  the  possibility  of  so 
doing  is  several  times  presented  as  a  motive  for  pursuing 
or  avoiding  a  given  course,^  while  the  earnest  disciple 
is  repeatedly  exhorted  not  to  neglect  the  instruction 
which  their  experience  fits  them  to  give  him.^ 

It  is,  of  course,  implied  in  the  just-cited  exhortations 
that  the  parents  will  give  all  diligence  to  the  instruction 
of  their  children  in  the  things  that  concern  their  well- 
being,  especially  since,  according  to  the  familiar  proverb 
of  22:6,  if  one 

Train  up  a  child  in  the  way  he  should  go, 

Even  when  he  becometh  old  he  will  not  depart  from  it. 

In  addition  it  is  made  the  duty,  apparently  of  the  father, 
if  he  finds  that 

Foolishness  is  boimd  up  in  the  heart  of  a  child, 

'  See  further  Prov.  5: 15  ff.;  9: 13  ff.;  22: 14;  23: 27  f.;  30: 20. 
^Prov.  15:5;  19:26;  20:20;  28:24;  30:11,17. 
aProv.  10:1;  15:20;  23:15;  27:11;  28:7;  29:3. 
^Prov.  1:8;  4:1;  6:20;  13:1;  23:22;  31:26. 


THE  BOOK  OF  PROVERBS  333 

to  see  to  it  that 

The  rod  of  correction  shall  drive  it  from  him;* 

the  inducement  to  this  stern  course  being  that 

He  that  spareth  the  rod  hateth  his  son, 

But  he  that  loveth  him  giveth  him  timely  chastisement.' 

One  gets  but  here  and  there  a  glimpse  through  the 
Proverbs  into  the  condition  of  the  slaves  of  the  period. 
They  had  their  place  in  every  family  that  enjoyed 
average  prosperity,  as  well  as  at  the  courts  of  kings. ^ 
Some  of  them  were  persons  who  had  been  brought  to 
servitude  by  laziness,  extravagance,  or  dissipation.^ 
On  the  other  hand  it  was  possible  for  a  slave,'  not  only 
to  gain  his  freedom,  but  to  acquire  wealth  and  attain 
great  honor. ^  The  author  of  30: 22  f.  evidently  felt  that, 
sometimes  at  least,  it  would  be  better  for  a  slave  to 
remain  in  bondage,  while,  according  to  29:19,  the 
general  character  of  servants  made  the  use  of  the  rod 
as  necessary  as  in  the  education  of  children. 

The  form  of  social  organization  reflected  in  the  Book 
of  Proverbs  is  the  monarchical.  The  whole  duty  of  the 
loyal  subject  is  comprehended  in  the  single  sentence. 

Fear  Yahweh,  my  son,  and  the  king.*' 

This  might  be  interpreted  as  requiring  obedience  to  a 
given  sovereign;  but  it  is  more  probably  a  general 
precept  implying  that  the  king  is  a  representative  of  the 
Deity,  and,  as  such,  fulfils  the  requirements  of  an  ideal 

'  Prov.  22:15. 

»Prov.  13:24.    See  also  19:18;  23:13  f.;  29:15,17. 

aProv.  12:9;  14:35;  30:10.  sprov.  17:2;  19:10;  3o:22f. 

^Prov.  11:29;  12:24;  29:21.        ^Prov.  24:21. 


334        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

administration.    At  any  rate,  it  is  the  ideal  ruler  who 
is  meant  in  8: 15,  where  Wisdom  declares, 

By  me  kings  rule, 

And  princes  decree  justice; 

and  in  16: 10,  which  reads, 

The  lips  of  the  king  are  an  oracle, 

His  mouth  doth  not  transgress  in  judgment.' 

In  all  these  passages  that  which  distinguishes  the 
ideal  king  above  everything  else  is  his  justice.  There 
is  another  series  of  proverbs  which  agree  in  teaching 
that  no  ruler  can  be  called  a  genuine  king,  unless  he  is 
just.    Thus,  20:26  says, 

A  wise  king  winnoweth  the  wicked, 
And  passe th  the  wheel  over  them; 

and  29:4, 

The  king  by  justice  establisheth  the  land, 
But  he  that  exacteth  gifts  overthroweth  it.* 

Indeed,  the  same  demand  is  laid  upon  all  who  have  any 
share  in  the  government  of  their  fellows,  for,  according 
to  18:5, 

To  favor  the  guilty  is  not  good. 

Also  to  deny  the  innocent  justice.^ 

Naturally  the  Proverbs  condemn  any  attempt  by 
bribery  to  "pervert  the  course  of  justice."^  Here, 
also,  belongs  28:17,  if,  as  seems  probable,  it  forbids  one 
to  assist  a  murderer  to  escape  the  penalty  of  the  crime 
that  he  has  committed. 

*  See  also  Prov.  16:12  f.;  20:8. 

'  See  also  Prov.  20:28  (Gr.);  29:14;  31:5,  8. 

3  See  also  Prov.  17:21;  21:15;  24:23!.;  28:5,21. 

*Prov.  15:27;  27:23;  28:21. 


THE  BOOK  OF  PROVERBS  335 

There  is  not  much  evidence  in  the  Proverbs  of 
familiarity  with  the  grosser  forms  of  injustice,  and  such 
as  exists  is  in  the  later  parts  of  the  book.  For  example, 
the  most  important  passage  bearing  on  the  subject  of 
violence  is  i :  10  ff.,  where  the  allurements  by  which  the 
thoughtless  are  led  into  crime  are  more  briefly,  but 
quite  as  vividly,  described  as  the  wiles  of  the  strange 
woman  in  the  seventh  chapter/  The  end,  too,  is  as 
strongly  depicted : 

They  lie  in  wait  for  their  own  blood, 
They  lurk  privily  for  their  own  lives.' 

The  teaching  of  21 : 7  is  to  the  same  effect.    It  says, 

The  violence  of  the  wicked  shall  sweep  them  away, 
Because  they  refuse  to  do  justice.^ 

The  oppression  of  the  weak  by  the  powerful  is 
represented  as  not  only  wicked  but  disastrous.  A 
king  who  offends  in  this  respect"*  is  "lacking  in  intelli- 
gence'^  * 

For  Yahweh  will  plead  their  cause, 
And  despoil  of  life  their  despoilers.s 

In  general  the  Proverbs  condemn  those  who  enter- 
tain the  thought  of  injuring  their  fellows  in  any  respect. 
Thus,  in  6:i6ff.  among  other  things  that  Yahweh 
especially  hates  is 

A  heart  that  deviseth  wicked  schemes.^ 

'  See  also  Prov.  16: 29.  a  See  further  Prov.  3:31;  6: 17. 

a  Prov.  1 :  18.  -*  Prov.  28 : 3,  15. 

sProv.  28:16;  22:22  f.;  also  14:31;  22:16;  28:3;  30:14.  In 
14:31  the  term  "slave"  is  probably  not  to  be  taken  literally. 

^  See  also  Prov.  12:2;  14:22;  15:26;  21:10;  24:8. 


336        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

The  rule  laid  down  for  the  wise  and  good  man  is, 

Devise  not  evil  against  thy  neighbor, 
Seeing  he  dwelleth  securely  by  thee.' 

He  is  warned  that 

Whoso  rewardeth  evil  for  good, 
Evil  shall  not  depart  from  his  house;* 

and  exhorted,  not  only  not  to  harbor  resentment 
against  those  who  have  injured  him,^  but  even  to  seek 
to  overcome  evil  with  good.    Says  25 :  21  f., 

If  thy  enemy  be  hungry,  give  him  to  eat, 
If  he  be  thirsty,  give  him  to  drink; 
Thus  shalt  thou  heap  coals  of  fire  on  his  head, 
And  Yahweh  will  reward  thee. 

This  is  a  remarkable  passage,  but  not  so  remarkable 
as  10:12,  for  the  love  that  is  there  recommended  is  a 
sentiment  unmixed  with  prudence  that  "covereth  all 
transgressions.  "4 

In  the  proverb  last  cited  love  is  the  preventive  for 
strife,  which  seemed  to  the  sages  a  great  evil.s  The 
causes  they  assign  for  it  are  greed,^  pride,'  irascibility,^ 
pugnacity,'  malevolence, '°  talebearing,"  and  insolence." 
The  fool,  being  what  he  is,  is  forever  quarreling,'^  but 
the  wise  man,  if  he  cannot  find  a  way  of  composing 
differences,  as,  for  example,  by  lot,'''  considers  it,  not  a 

'Prov.  3:29.  *Prov.  15:18;  29:22. 

»Prov.  17:13.  •Prov.  26:21;  30:33. 

3  Prov.  20:22;  24:17,  29.               "Prov.  10:12. 

*  I  Pet.  4:8.  "  Prov.  16: 28;  26: 20. 

s  Prov.  17 :  14,  19.                            "  Prov.  22 :  10. 

«  Prov.  28 :  25.  «3  Prov.  18:6. 

'  Prov.  13 :  10;  17 :  19.                      »<  Prov.  18: 18. 


THE  BOOK  OF  PROVERBS  337 

reproach,  but  an  honor  "to  pass  over  a  transgression."* 
Naturally,  it  is  as  reprehensible  to  sow  discord  as  to 
take  part  in  the  resulting  quarrel.^ 

There  are  in  the  Proverbs  only  a  few  references  to 
the  rights  of  property.  One  passage,^  in  which  robbery 
of  the  poor  is  forbidden,  has  already  been  cited  in  another 
connection.  There  are  others  showing  that,  when  they 
were  written,  theft  was  considered  disgraceful.  According 
to  6:3of.,  even  when  a  man  stole  to  satisfy  hunger,  he 
was  obHged  to  "return  sevenfold,''  if  it  took  "all  the 
substance  of  his  house. ""*  The  partner  of  a  thief,  even 
if  he  succeeds  in  hiding  his  complicity,  is  warned  that 
he  "hateth  his  own  soul,"  that  is,  tempts  God  to 
destroy  him. 

Here  belongs  the  prohibition  of  the  removal  of 
landmarks,^  especially  those  of  orphans,^  borrowed  from 
the  Deuteronomic  Code.''  In  that  code,  also,  it  is 
forbidden  to  use  the  diverse  weights  and  measures^  of 
which  this  book,  no  fewer  than  three  times,^  declares  that 
they  are  "an  abomination  to  Yahweh."  The  sages, 
however,  go  farther  and  condemn  the  buyer  who  depre- 
ciates the  goods  he  is  trying  to  purchase,  saying, 

It  is  bad,  it  is  bad,  .... 

But,  when  he  is  gone  his  way,  he  boasteth 

of  his  bargain.*" 

The  social  duties  thus  far  discussed  may  be  viewed 
as  so  many  manifestations  of  the  cardinal  virtue  of 

*  Prov.  19:11;  also  3 :  30;  20 : 3.  ^  Prov.  23 :  10. 
'Prov.  6:14,  19;  11:9.  'Deut.  19:14. 
3Prov.  22:22.  *  Deut.  25:13  ff. 

*  See  also  Prov.  30:9.  »  Prov.  11:  i;  20:10,  23. 
s  Prov.  22 :  28.  **  Prov.  20: 14. 


338        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

righteousness.  There  is  another  class  that  are  phases 
of  a  second  quality,  equally  prominent  in  the  Proverbs, 
the  Hebrew  word  for  which  is  generally  rendered 
''truth,''  but  which  often,  as  has  elsewhere  been  shown, 
has  the  broader  meaning  of  "trustworthiness."  It  has 
various  synonyms,  one  of  which  occurs  in  30:5  f., 
where  the  word  of  God  is  described  as  "refined,"  that 
is,  pure.  There  are  a  number  in  8 : 6-9,  where  Wisdom 
says  of  her  instruction: 

Hear,  for  I  speak  verities, 

And  my  open  lips  things  that  are  correct. 

For  my  mouth  uttereth  truth, 

And  wicked  lips  are  an  abomination  to  me. 

All  the  words  of  my  mouth  are  just, 

There  is  nothing  in  them  wrong  or  awry. 

They  are  all  right  to  him  that  understandeth, 

And  correct  to  those  that  find  knowledge.^ 

Trustworthiness  is  one  of  the  three  virtues  by  which 
kings  attain  and  retain  their  power,^  and  it  is  equally 
necessary  in  the  lowhest  subject  who  would  find  favor 
with  Crod  or  man.^  Hence  the  disciple  is  advised  to 
"buy  the  truth,"  that  is,  in  the  language  of  Paul, 
"whatsoever  things  are  true,"^  assured  that  they  will 
endure,  while  all  that  is  false  must  speedily  perish.^ 
He  is  also  exhorted  to  cherish  genuine  friendships, 
remembering  that,  although 

There  are  friends  for  compam'onship, 

There  is  a  friend  that  sticketh  closer  than  a  brother.* 

*  See  also  Prov.  22:21.  s  Prov.  3:33;  16:6. 

^  Prov.  20: 28.  *  Prov.  23 :  23. 

5  Prov.  12:19,  22. 

^Prov.  18:24.    See  also  17:17;  27:10. 


THE  BOOK  OF  PROVERBS  339 

These  passages  are  clear  and  convincing,  but  they 
by  no  means  measure  the  importance  given  to  trust- 
worthiness by  the  Hebrew  sages.  An  adequate  idea  on 
the  subject  can  only  be  obtained  by  considering  how 
much  space  is  given  in  the  Proverbs  to  the  exposure 
and  condemnation  of  falsehood  or  untrustworthiness 
in  its  various  manifestations. 

First  of  all,  there  are  the  deception  that  seals  the 
lips  of  the  wicked  while  they  are  planning  the  dis- 
comfiture of  the  righteous,^  and  the  treachery  which, 
"like  a  bad  tooth  or  a  weak  foot,"^  hides  itself  until 
confidence  will  be  most  disastrous.  In  23:28  "the 
strange  woman"  is  charged  with  multiplying  traitors. 
Here  the  word  "traitor"  may  mean  an  unfaithful 
husband,  but,  since  it  is  repeatedly  used  of  a  wicked 
man,  it  is  probable  that  in  this  case  it  denotes  one 
who  has  repudiated  the  claims  of  religion  and  mor- 
aHty.  This  distinction,  however,  is  not  important, 
since  the  traitors  of  the  general  t3T)e  are  consigned  to 
destruction. 3 

The  untrustworthy  of  the  Book  of  Proverbs  are 
mostly  such  as  have  sinned  with  their  mouths.  There 
is,  first,  the  simple  Har.  Now^  as  has  repeatedly  been 
noted,  the  earher  Hebrews  did  not  condemn  simple 
falsehood.  The  later  Hterature,  however,  reveals  a 
growing  sensitiveness  on  the  subject.  This  book  is 
especially  emphatic  in  condemnation  of  "a  lying 
tongue,"  which,  according  to  6:17  is  another  of  the 
seven  things  "that  Yahweh  hateth."'*     (k)od  men  also 

^Prov.  12:5,  20.  "Prov.  25:19. 

sProv.  2:22;  11:3,6;  13:2,15;  21:18;  22:12. 
*  See  also  Prov.  12:22. 


340        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

hate  a  lie,'  and  shrink  from  the  thought  of  telling  one,^ 
knowing  that  it  brings  its  own  punishment,^  and  that 
therefore  the  truthful  man,  though  poor,  has  no  occasion 
to  envy  the  rich  liar.^ 

A  false  witness,  as  has  been  shown,  was  always  an 
abomination  to  the  Hebrews.  It  is  not  strange,  there- 
fore, to  find  him  also  among  the  things  especially  offen- 
sive to  Yahweh.s  He  is  the  more  severely  condemned 
because  by  his  testimony  he  seeks  to,  and  often  actually 
does,  defeat  the  ends  of  justice.^  He  is  therefore  a 
menace  to  the  community  in  which  he  lives,'  and  will 
certainly  in  the  end  receive  his  deserts.^ 

Flattery,  which  is  sometimes  regarded  as  a  harmless 
form  of  deception,  is  forbidden  because  it  is  seldom 
profitable  to  the  one  who  employs  it^  and  often  very 
injurious  to  a  susceptible  object.'" 

On  h3^ocrisy  one  cannot  do  better  than  to  let  the 
book  speak  for  itself  by  quoting  in  extenso  26:23-26. 

It  reads: 

Like  drossy  silver  laid  upon  pottery 
Are  flattering  lips  and  a  bad  heart. 
With  his  lips  an  enemy  dissembleth, 
While  within  him  he  holdeth  deceit. 
When  he  speaketh  graciously,  trust  him  not; 
For  there  are  seven  abominations  in  his  heart. 
Whoso  covereth  hatred  with  guile, 
His  wickedness  shall  be  exposed. 

Last,  but  not  least,  among  oral  offenses  are  two  that 
are  not  clearly  distinguished,  namely,  tale-bearing  and 

*Prov.  13:5;  17:7.  *Prov.  12:17;  14^25;  19:18. 

»  Prov.  30: 8.  7  Prov.  25 :  18. 

3Prov.  12:19.  *Prov.  19:5,  9;  21:28;  also  24:28. 

*  Prov.  19 :  22.  9  Prov.  28: 23. 

*  Prov.  6:19.  "Prov.  26:28b;  27:14;  29:5. 


THE  BOOK  OF  PROVERBS  341 

slander.  On  the  former  may  be  cited  certain  passages 
of  which  25 :  yb-S  is  a  good  example.    It  reads: 

What  thy  eyes  have  seen 

Make  not  hastily  public. 

What  wilt  thou  do  in  the  end 

When  thy  neighbor  putteth  thee  to  shame  ? 

Here  the  motive  for  refraining  from  telling  stories, 
even  true  ones,  prejudicial  to  a  neighbor,  is  the  would- 
be  tattler's  regard  for  his  own  reputation.'  There  is 
another  series  of  passages  in  which  the  offense  is  clearly 
slander.    One  of  them  is  16: 27,  which  declares  that 

With  his  mouth  the  godless  destroyeth  his  neighbor. 

In  all  these,  except  18:8  (26:22),  where  the  natural 
appetite  for  slander  is  depicted,  it  is  the  harm  to  the 
slandered  to  which  attention  is  directed.^ 

The  third  of  the  great  social  virtues  by  which  the 
ideal  king,^  and,  indeed,  the  ideal  man,  is  characterized 
is  kindness.^  By  it,  as  by  trustworthiness  or  faithful- 
ness, one  finds  *' favor  with  God  and  man."^ 

In  the  passages  cited  the  proper  objects  of  the  virtue 
in  question  are  not  specified.  This  fact  does  not  warrant 
the  inference  that  the  sages  had  in  mind  a  mere  senti- 
ment toward  men  in  general.  The  usage  with  reference 
to  the  word  rendered  "kindness"  forbids  such  a  supposi- 
tion. The  word  implies  a  need  which,  whether  it  is 
put  into  words  or  remains  mute,  appeals  to  those  who 

*  See  also  Prov.  17:9;  25:9,  23;  30:10. 

'  See  also  Prov.  11:13;  16:27,  28,  30;   26:20,  28;  29:12. 

3  Prov.  20:28. 

<Prov.  3:3;  31:26. 

s  Prov.  3:4;  also  2:8;  11:17;  16:6;  19:22;  21:21. 


342        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

have  the  benevolent  disposition  and,  when  they  have 
a  corresponding  abihty,  receives  a  response  in  the  form 
of  sympathetic  activity.  Hence  it  is  used,  especially 
in  the  Psalms,  of  the  intervention  of  Yahweh  for  the 
benefit  of  his  creatures,^  and  throughout  the  Old  Testa- 
ment of  the  readiness  of  human  beings,  whatever  their 
station,  to  lend  a  hand  in  an  emergency.^  In  the  Prov- 
erbs it  has  the  latter  meaning,  which  appears  very 
clearly  in  11:17,  where  the  antithesis  of  ''kind"  is 
"cruel."  If,  however,  active  sympathy  is  required  in 
the  temporary  disturbances  to  which  human  happiness 
is  subject,  it  certainly  is  a  more  imperative  duty  toward 
the  unfortunate  classes.  This  is  the  teaching  of  the 
Proverbs.  In  the  first  place,  the  well-to-do  are  expressly 
forbidden  to  take  advantage  of  those  who  are  more  or 
less  dependent  by  oppressing  them,^  robbing  them  of 
their  scant  possessions,"*  or  charging  them  discount  or 
interest  on  money  and  other  things  that  they  are  com- 
pelled to  borrow.^ 

The  poor  are  also  especially  commended  to  the 
charity  of  those  who  are  able  to  reHeve  their  wants. 
The  ultimate  ground  for  the  sympathy  required  is  that 

The  rich  and  the  poor  meet  together, 
Yahweh  is  the  maker  of  them  all.<^ 

The  moral  standing  of  a  man  may  be  determined  by  his 
treatment  of  this  obHgation.     Says  29: 7, 

The  righteous  regardeth  the  cause  of  the  poor, 
The  wicked  hath  no  mind  to  regard  it. 

^Ps.  33:4f.  •♦Prov.  22:22. 

"  I  Sam.  20 : 8, 14  f . ;  II  Sam.  10:2.        s  Prov.  28 : 8. 

3  Prov.  14:31.  ^  Prov.  22:2.    Seealso  29:13. 


THE  BOOK  OF  PROVERBS  343 

The  disciple  is  warned  not  to  imitate  the  latter  in  3 :  27  f . : 

Withhold  not  help  from  him  that  deserve th  it(  ?), 

When  it  is  in  thy  power  to  act. 

Say  not  to  thy  neighbor,  Go,  and  come  again, 

And  tomorrow  I  will  give,  when  thou  hast  aught  by  thee.^ 

On  the  other  hand,  he  is  encouraged  in  an  opposite 
course  by  repeated  assurances  of  the  divine  favor. 
One  of  the  most  familiar  of  the  passages  bearing  on 
this  point  is  19:17, 

He  that  hath  pity  on  the  poor  lendeth  to  Yahweh, 

And  a  due  reward  will  he  pay  him." 

The  same  end  is  sought  in  the  description  of  the  ideal 
man^  and  the  ideal  woman^  as  givers;  also  in  the  com- 
parison. 

Clouds  and  wind,  but  no  rain — 

Such  is  he  that  boasteth  of  gifts  ungiven.s 

Little  is  said  in  the  Proverbs  concerning  the  widow 
and  the  orphan,  but  according  to  15:25  and  23:iof., 
their  property  is  under  the  special  protection  of  Yahweh. 

Here,  no  doubt,  belong  24:11  f.,  where  he  whom  it 
concerns  is  exhorted  to 

Deliver  those  that  are  being  haled  to  death. 
And  rescue  those  that  are  staggering  to  be  slain, 

and,  in  case  he  is  inclined  to  excuse  himself  from  inter- 
fering, is  warned  that  he  cannot  thus  easily  escape 
responsibiHty: 

If  thou  sayest,  I  knew  naught  thereof. 

Will  not  he  that  weigheth  hearts  perceive  ? 

Nay,  he  that  keepeth  watch  on  thy  soul  will  know, 

And  he  will  render  to  every  man  according  as  he  acteth. 

*  See  also  Prov.  17:5;   21:13. 

^  See  also  Prov.  11:24,  25,  26;   14:21,31;   22:9;   28:27. 

3  Prov.  21 :  26.  ■♦  Prov.  31 :  20.  s  Prov.  25 :  14. 


344        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

The  situation  is  not  clear.  There  are  some  who  main- 
tain that  those  who  are  to  be  rescued  are  persons  who 
have  been  tried  and  found  guilty,  and  interpret  the 
exhortation  as  a  protest  against  capital  punishment. 
So  DeHtzsch.  But  it  is  more  probable  that  they  are 
the  intended  victims  of  violence,  and  that,  therefore, 
the  passage,  Hke  Exod.  23:2,  is  a  demand  for  law  and 
order,  and  protection  under  them  for  the  humblest 
member  of  the  community. 

Finally  the  sages  taught  that  the  righteous  could  be 
distinguished  from  the  wicked  by  their  treatment  of 
dumb  animals,  for 

The  righteous  man  regardeth  the  life  of  his  beast, 
But  the  mercy  of  the  wicked  is  cruel.^ 

The  absence  in  the  Proverbs  of  any  reference  to  the 
foreigner  is  noteworthy,  but  easily  explained :  Wisdom's 
appeal  is  to  "the  sons  of  men"  and  not  to  or  for  any 
nationality.^ 

*  Prov.  12:10.  » Prov.  8 : 4. 


CHAPTER  XXVIII 
THE  SONG  OF  SOLOMON 

There  is  no  book  in  the  Old  Testament  about  which 
and  its  value  there  have  been  more  widely  different 
opinions  than  *'the  Song  of  Songs,  which  is  Solomon^s." 
It  doubtless  owes  its  place  in  the  Canon  to  the  belief 
that  it  was  written  by  Solomon,  and  that  it  was  the 
intention  of  the  royal  author  thereby  to  depict  the 
blissfully  intimate  relation  between  Yahweh  and  his 
people.  This  is  the  thought  that  the  Jews  found  in 
it  when  they  read  it  on  the  eighth  day  of  the  feast  of 
the  Passover. 

The  allegorical  interpretation  was  adopted  by  the 
early  Christians,  and  it  continued  for  many  centuries 
to  be  the  almost  unchallenged  opinion  in  all  branches  of 
the  church.  Indeed,  it  is  only  within  recent  times  that 
its  correctness  has  been  widely  questioned  or  rejected. 

The  Song  of  Songs,  taken  as  an  allegory,  becomes 
an  almost  purely  reHgious  production,  with  an  ethical 
element  showing  itself  in  the  faithfulness  of  the  sym- 
bolical pair  to  the  covenant  between  them.  The  ethi- 
cal element  is  brought  into  prominence  by  a  modern 
interpretation  according  to  which,  in  its  most  developed 
form,  the  book  is  a  dramatic  poem  picturing  the  futile 
efforts  of  the  historical  Solomon  to  win  a  humble  but 
beautiful  maiden  from  an  equally  humble  lover;  and 
those  who  adopt  this  or  any  similar  interpretation 
contend  that  this  ethical  quality  justifies  the  retention 
of  the  book  in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures. 

34S 


346        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

The  latest  view  is  that  the  Song  of  Solomon  is  not  a 
dramatic  unit,  but  a  collection  of  lyrics  such  as  are 
still  sung  during  the  festive  week  that  follows  a  wedding 
in  some  parts  of  Syria,  where  the  newly  wedded  pair 
are  crowned  and  treated  as  king  and  queen  by  their 
friends  and  neighbors.  If  this  is  correct,  it  is  clear, 
in  the  first  place,  that  the  severity  with  which  the  book 
has  sometimes  been  criticized  must  be  considerably 
mitigated,  since  language  and  relations  that  would  be 
immoral  between  mere  lovers  become  permissible  when 
the  parties  concerned  have  been  united  in  marriage. 
On  the  other  hand,  it  can  hardly  be  said  that  the  book 
was  intended  to  teach  an  ethical  or  religious  lesson  or 
lessons.  The  compiler  of  it  seems  to  have  been  actuated 
by  a  desire  to  preserve  and  recommend  to  others  the 
pieces  of  which  it  is  composed,  chiefly  for  their  Hterary 
excellence  and  their  influence  toward  the  perpetuation 
of  an  immemorial  custom.  If,  therefore,  these  songs 
have  any  ethical  significance,  it  is  only  incidental  and 
naturally  confined  to  the  subjects  of  woman  and 
marriage. 

The  first  thing  that  strikes  one,  when  reading  the 
book,  is  the  absence  of  any  allusion  to  the  virtual  sale 
of  girls  by  their  fathers  to  their  prospective  husbands 
among  the  Hebrews.  In  fact,  the  whole  tone  of  the 
book  is  such  as  almost  to  suggest  a  question  whether, 
when  the  songs  originated,  this  custom  still  prevailed. 
It  is  an  intense  desire  for  each  other  that  binds  the  young 
couple  together,  and,  according  to  2 :  10-14,  this  mutual 
affection  existed  before  they  were  united  in  marriage. 
See  also  the  dream  of  3:1-4,  but  especially  that  of 
5:2  fi.,  in  which  he  tells  of  wandering  at  night  sleepless 


THE  SONG  OF  SOLOMON  347 

from  love  and  she  confesses  herself  *'sick"  with  an 
answering  longing.  Doubtless,  when  a  young  man  and 
a  young  woman  were  found  to  have  chosen  each  other, 
their  relatives  usually  indorsed  their  choice,  realizing 
that,  as  the  bride  in  8 : 6  declares, 

Love  is  strong  as  death, 
A  passion  as  resistless  as  Sheol. 

The  passage  just  partly  quoted  is  significant  as 
an  indication,  not  only  of  the  influence  of  personal 
preference  in  marriages  among  the  Hebrews,  but  also 
of  the  character  of  the  "love"  by  which  men  and  women 
were  sometimes,  at  least,  brought  together.  There 
is  so  much  said  in  other  parts  of  the  book  about  the 
physical  charms  of  both  of  the  principa,l  personages, 
and  their  sensuous  deHght  in  each  other,  that  often 
the  term  seems  to  mean  little  more  than  sexual  attrac- 
tion. Here,  however,  it  is  clearly  something  higher  and 
nobler;  for  it  is  only  love  in  its  highest  manifestations 
of  which  it  can  be  said  that 

Water  cannot  quench  it, 

Nor  do  rivers  drown  it; 

If  one  offer  all  the  wealth  of  one's  house 

For  love,  they  will  utterly  reject  it.' 

It  is  easy  to  imagine  the  effect  of  a  genuine  affection 
between  husbands  and  wives.  In  the  first  place,  the 
existence  of  such  a  bond  would  naturally  prevent  men 
from  taking  more  than  one  wife,  except  when  the  first 
was  barren;  and  even  then  there  would  be  some  who 
would  "go  childless"  rather  than  introduce  a  rival  to  the 
unfortunate  woman  into  the  family.    There  are  passages 

'Songof  Sol.  8:7. 


348        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

in  these  songs  that  point  to  such  an  effect.  One  of 
them  is  the  Hne  by  the  bride, 

My  beloved  is  mine,  and  I  am  his, 

in  2:16,  repeated  with  variations  in  6:3  and  7:10; 
but  the  most  pointed  is  6:8  f.,  where,  according  to 
Budde,  one  should  read, 

Solomon  had  sixty  queens, 
And  eighty  concubines, 
And  maidens  numberiess; 
My  dove,  the  faultless,  is  one. 

A  sentiment  of  this  sort  leaves  no  room  for  polygamy. 

A  second  effect  of  love  of  the  higher  quaUty  would  be 
to  lift  women  as  a  class  toward  man's  level.  It  is  not 
strange,  therefore,  that  in  this  book  there  is  found  no 
trace  of  inequaUty  between  the  sexes.  The  bridegroom 
is  as  extravagant  in  praise  of  the  bride  as  she  is  in 
describing  his  perfections.  He  is  "altogether  lovely,"* 
and  she  is  not  only  always  the  "fairest  among  women,"* 
but,  in  her  power  over  him,  "terrible  as  an  army  with 
banners."^  The  duration  of  mutual  admiration  in  any 
given  case  would,  of  course,  depend  upon  the  possession 
by  the  parties  concerned  of  internal  quahties  correspond- 
ing to  their  external  attractions. 

'  Song  of  Sol.  5:16.  3  Song  of  Sol.  6 : 4. 

» Song  of  Sol.  1:8. 


CHAPTER  XXIX 

THE  BOOKS  OF  CHRONICLES,  EZRA   AND 
NEHEMIAH 

In  the  Hebrew  Bible  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  precede 
the  Books  of  Chronicles;  but  this  order  should  be 
reversed,  as  it  is  in  the  EngHsh  Version,  since  it  is 
perfectly  plain,  not  only  that  all  these  books  came  from  j 
the  same  source,  but  that  they  once  formed  a  continuous 
history.  The  date  to  which  they  are  assigned  is  toward 
the  beginning  of  the  Greek  period,  or  about  three  hun- 
dred years  before  the  Christian  era.  There  was  then 
an  abundance  of  material  of  one  kind  and  another  for  a 
history  of  the  Hebrews,  for  the  succession  of  historical 
books  from  Genesis  to  Kings  inclusive  had  long  been 
completed,  and  there  were  other  lesser  works  of  a 
similar  character,  to  say  nothing  of  the  prophetical 
books  with  their  vivid  pictures  of  contemporary  affairs 
and  conditions.  The  Chronicler,  however,  did  not 
draw  upon  all  the  sources  available  or  treat  the  material 
he  used  as  a  modern  historian  would  have  treated  it. 
He  was  a  Levite,  and  his  object  was  to  glorify  Jerusalem  / 
and  its  temple,  but  especially  to  magnify  the  importance  ,.X^ 
of  the  guild  that  furnished  the  music  in  the  ritual  of  the 
sanctuary.  It  is  the  narrowness  of  his  purpose  which 
accounts  for  the  fact  that  the  first  nine  chapters  of  his 
work  consist  of  a  series  of  genealogies  and  it  is  only 
when  he  comes  to  the  end  of  Saul's  unhappy  reign  that 
he  begins  the  narrative  proper.  It  also  explains  why, 
at  every  opportunity,  he  introduces  the  Levites,  and 

349 


350        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

often,  so  far  as  can  be  determined,  without  warrant 
from  earlier  authorities.  The  following  is  a  list  of  the 
more  important  examples  of  this  practice,  with  the 
passages  in  the  books  of  Samuel  and  Kings  to  which  the 
Chronicler  was  indebted  for  the  main  points  in  his 
narrative:  I  Chron.,  chaps.  15  f.  (II  Sam.  6:12  ff.); 
chaps.  23-29  (I  KLings  2 :  i  ff .) ;  II  Chron.,  chaps.  5  f . 
(I  Kings  8);  20:1-30  (II  Kings  3);  chap.  23  (II  Kings 
11:4-20);  24:4-14  (II  Kings  12:4-16);  29:3 — 31:21 
(II  Kings  18:4);  34:8-13  (II  Eangs  22:3-7);  35:1-19 
(II  Kings  23:21-23);  Neh.  9. 

One  cannot  study  the  passages  cited  and  their 
parallels  without  suspecting  the  Chronicler's  reliability 
as  a  historian.  There  are  other  indications  that  are 
equally  damaging.  In  the  first  place,  there  are  many 
passages  in  which  he  is  guilty  of  evident  exaggeration. 
The  most  notable  are  the  following: 

I  Chron.  19:6  f.,  where  the  Ammonites  are  reported 
to  have  hired  32,000  chariots  at  an  expense  of  1,000 
talents  of  silver,  or  about  $1,952,000. 

I  Chron.  21:5,  where  the  number  of  warriors  in 
Judah  and  Israel,  exclusive  of  Levi  and  Benjamin,  is 
given  as  1,500,000,  representing  a  population  of  perhaps 
6,000,000. 

I  Chron.  22 :  14,  where  David  is  said  to  have  provided 
for  the  ornamentation  of  the  temple  100,000  talents  of 
gold  and  1,000,000  of  silver,  the  value  of  which  would 
be  about  $4,910,000,000. 

I  Chron.  29:4,  where  David's  private  contribution 
to  the  fund  for  the  temple  is  reported  to  have  been 
3,000  talents  of  gold  and  7,000  of  silver,  or  about 
$101,504,000. 


CHRONICLES,  EZRA,  AND  NEHEMIAH         351 

I  Chron.  29:7,  where  the  sum  of  the  offerings  of  the 
notables  for  the  same  fund  is  5,000  talents  and  10,000 
darics  of  gold  and  10,000  talents  of  silver,  or  about 
$165,973,680. 

II  Chron.  13:3,  17,  where  the  army  of  Abijah  is 
said  to  have  consisted  of  400,000,  and  that  of  Jeroboam  I 
of  800,000  men,  the  number  of  Israel's  slain  being  no 
less  than  500,000. 

II  Chron.  14 : 8  f .,  where  Asa's  army  numbers  580,000, 
and  that  of  the  invading  Ethiopians  1,000,000  men. 

II  Chron.  17:145.,  where  the  strength  of  Jehosha- 
phat's  army  is  reported  to  have  been  1,120,000  men. 

II  Chron.  28:6  ff.,  where  Pekah,  when  he  invaded 
Judah,  is  said  to  have  slain  *'in  Judah  120,000,  all  of 
them  valiant  men,  in  one  day,"  and  carried  away 
captive  200,000  women  and  children. 

It  is  evident,  too,  that  the  Chronicler  has  suppressed 
much  that  conflicted  with  his  idea  of  the  history  of  his 
people.  The  most  notable  of  these  omissions  occurs 
in  his  account  of  the  reign  of  David.  Thus,  although 
he  copies  from  II  Sam.,  chaps.  10  ff.,  the  main  features 
of  the  siege  and  capture  of  Rabbath  Ammon,  with 
only  slight  modifications,  except  with  reference  to  the 
number  of  Syrians  who  came  to  the  support  of  the 
Ammonites,  he  omits  any  reference  to  the  double  crime 
of  the  Hebrew  king  against  Uriah  the  Hittite  recorded 
in  II  Sam.  11:2  ff.  He  is  equally  silent  concerning 
the  story  of  Rizpah,^  the  rebellion  of  Absalom, 
together  with  the  troubles  that  immediately  preceded 
and  followed  it,^  and  the  unseemly  rivalry  between 
Solomon  and  Adonijah  by  which  David's  last  days 

*II  Sam.  2i:iff.  » 11  Sam.  13:1 — 20:22. 


352        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

were  clouded/  The  same  is  true  of  the  account  of 
Solomon's  removal  of  Joab,  Adonijah,  and  Shimei,* 
the  apostasy  of  Solomon  and  the  adversaries  that 
plagued  his  later  years.^ 

Finally  there  are  cases  in  which  the  Chronicler  has 
intentionally  changed  statements  of  earUer  writers. 
Thus,  while  II  Sam.  21:19  says  that  it  was  a  Bethle- 
hemite  by  the  name  of  Elhanan  who  slew  Goliath  of 
Gath,  the  Chronicler  in  I  Chron.  20:5,  evidently  for  the 
purpose  of  harmonizing  this  statement  with  I  Sam., 
chap.  17,  says  that  the  man  slain  by  Elhanan  was 
Lahmi  a  brother  of  the  Philistine  champion.     See  also 

I  Chron.  21:1,  where  it  is  Satan,  and  not,  as  in  II  Sam. 
24: 1,  Yahweh,  who  incites  David  to  number  his  people; 

II  Chron.  8:2,  where  the  cities  which,  according  to  I 
Kings  9:i2f.,  Solomon  gave  to  Hiram  of  Tyre  are 
described  as  "the  cities  which  Huram  had  given  to 
Solomon";  II  Chron.,  chap.  13,  where  Abijah,  who, 
in  I  Kings  15:3  f.,  is  accused  of  walking  "in  all  the  sins 
of  his  father,"  is  represented  as  an  especial  favorite 
of  Yahweh;  II  Chron.  21:20,  where  the  statement  of 
II  Kings  8:24,  that  Jehoram  of  Judah  "was  buried 
with  his  fathers  in  the  city  of  David,"  is  directly  con- 
tradicted; II  Chron.  20:36,  where  the  Chronicler,  to 
account  for  the  shipwreck  of  Jehoshaphat's  fleet,  says 
that  he  accepted  the  invitation  of  Ahaziah  of  Israel, 
which  I  ELings  22:41  says  that  he  declined;  and  Ezra 
4:7  ff.,  where  a  story  relating  to  the  restoration  of  the 
wall  of  Jerusalem  is  incorporated  into  an  account  of 
the  erection  of  the  second  temple. 

'  I  Kings,  chap.  i.  3 1  Kings  ii :  1-40. 

'  I  Kings,  chap.  3. 


CHRONICLES,  EZRA,  AND  NEHEMIAH         353 

Other  instances  of  violence  done  by  the  Chronicler  to 
his  sources  might  be  cited,  and  other  forms  of  evidence 
presented,  but  enough  has  been  adduced  to  show  that 
his  methods  were  such  as  no  genuine  historian  would 
either  employ  or  countenance,  and  that,  consequently, 
the  books  attributed  to  him  cannot,  in  themselves,  be 
regarded  as  trustworthy  sources  of  information  on  the 
history  of  the  Chosen  People.  This  fact  has,  of  course, 
a  bearing  on  the  subject  of  the  ethical  development  of 
the  Hebrews,  but  its  real  significance  may  easily  be 
misunderstood.  It  is  true  that  one  cannot  go  to  these 
books  expecting  always  to  find  reliable  data  for  deter- 
mining the  degree  of  ethical  progress  made  by  the 
Hebrews  at  any  time  during  the  long  period  covered 
by  the  narrative,  since,  as  has  been  shown,  it  has 
comparatively  Httle  material  of  this  kind  to  offer,  and 
such  as  it  has  is  liable  to  be  worthless  for  the  given 
purpose;  but  the  case  is  different  when  the  work  is 
viewed  simply  as  a  product  of  the  Greek  period  and 
studied  as  a  mirror  of  the  ethical  ideas  of  the  author, 
and  doubtless  of  many  of  his  Jewish  contemporaries. 

Treating  it  thus  the  reader  will  at  once  begin  to  see 
that  the  author,  in  spite  of  his  lawless  methods,  regarded 
himself  as  an  ethical  teacher,  and  that,  although  his 
ideas  are  sometimes  mistaken,  his  pretensions  are  not 
without  foundation. 

In  the  first  place,  he  believed  with  all  his  heart  in 
a  moral  order.  He  was  utterly  impervious  to  the  doubts 
on  the  subject  that  show  themselves  in  Jeremiah's 
confessions,  and  burst  into  unrestrained  expression 
in  the  Book  of  Job.  Moreover,  he  inferred,  as  did  Job's 
friends,  that  suffering  implied  sin,  and  undertook  to 


354        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

show  how  the  principal  figures  in  his  narrative  incurred 
the  misfortunes  from  which  they  suffered.  Thus,  in 
I  Chron.  5 :  i  he  explains  the  transfer  of  the  birthright 
from  Reuben  to  Joseph  by  recalling  Gen.  35:22,  where 
the  former  is  reported  to  have  ''defiled  his  father's 
couch."  In  his  treatment  of  the  Hebrew,  more  pre- 
cisely the  Judean,  monarchy  he  goes  beyond  the  compiler 
of  the  Books  of  Kings,  who  is  generally  content  with 
passing  judgment  on  each  of  the  kings  of  Judah  and 
Israel,  leaving  the  reader  to  connect  the  events  narrated 
with  the  conduct  of  the  characters  involved.  The 
following  list  of  instances  will  abundantly  illustrate  his 
method : 

Shishak,  the  king  of  Egypt  "came  up  against  Jeru- 
salem, because  they  (Rehoboam  and  his  people)  had 
trespassed  against  Yahweh";  II  Chron.  12:1  f.;  cf. 
I  Kings  14:22  ff. 

Asa  had  repeated  wars  and  suffered  greatly  from 
disease,  because  he  appealed  to  human  helpers  rather 
than  Yahweh;  II  Chron.  16:7  &.;  cf.  I  Kings  15:16  ff. 

Jehoshaphat's  fleet  was  destroyed  to  punish  him  for 
joining  himself  with  Ahaziah,  king  of  Israel,  in  a  com- 
mercial enterprise;  II  Chron.  20:355.;  cf.  I  Kings 
22:48  f. 

Jehoram  was  afflicted  in  various  ways,  because  he 
was  disloyal  to  Yahweh  and  slew  his  brethren  and  others 
with  the  sword;  II  Chron.  21:12  fif.;  cf.  II  Kings 
8:i8ff. 

Ahaziah  fell  in  the  revolution  at  Jezreel,  because 
"he  went  to  Joram''  of  Israel;  II  Chron.  22:7  j6f.; 
cf.  II  ELings  8:25  ff.;  9:27^ 

Jehoash  was  assassinated,  after  an  invasion  by  the 


CHRONICLES,  EZRA,  AND  NEHEMIAH         355 

Syrians,  ''for  the  blood  of  the  son  of  Jehoiada";  II 
Chron.  24:2off.;  cf.  II  Kings  12:17  ff. 

Amaziah  was  assassinated,  because  he  ''turned  away 
from  following  Yahweh";  II  Chron.  25:14-16,  27; 
cf.  II  Kings  14:7,  19. 

Uzziah  was  smitten  with  leprosy,  because  he  under- 
took to  usurp  the  office  of  a  priest;  II  Chron.  26: 16  jff.; 
cf.  II  Kings  i5:5ff. 

Ahaz  was  delivered  into  the  hands  of  the  neighboring 
peoples,  because  he  "trespassed  sore  against  Yahweh'*; 
II  Chron.  28:1  ff.;  cf.  II  Kings  16:1  ff. 

The  wrath  of  Yahweh  was  upon  Hezekiah,  because 
"his  heart  was  lifted  up,"  and  "he  rendered  not  again 
according  to  the  benefit  done  him";  II  Chron.  32 :  24  f. ; 
cf.  II  Kings  20:12  ff. 

Manasseh  was  delivered  into  the  hands  of  the 
Assyrians,  because  he  served  other  gods;  II  Chron.; 
33:iof.;  cf.  II  Kings  21:10-15. 

Amon,  who  did  not  repent  of  his  misdeeds,  met  a 
violent  death;  II  Chron.  33 :  21  ff. ;  cf .  II  Kings  21:195. 

Josiah  was  killed  in  battle,  because  he  would  not 
listen  to  a  warning  against  interfering  with  Necho,  the 
king  of  Egypt,  on  his  march  against  Carchemish; 
II  Chron.  35 :  20  ff . ;  cf .  II  Kings  23 :  29  f . 

Jehoiakim,  who  "did  that  which  was  evil  in  the 
sight  of  Yahweh,"  was  dethroned  and  carried  into 
captivity;    II  Chron.  36:5-8;    cf.  II  Kings   23:365.; 

Jehoiachin,  who  followed  his  father's  example, 
suffered  the  same  fate;  II  Chron.  36:9  f.;  cf.  II  Kings 
24:8  ff. 

Zedekiah,  also,  was  dethroned  and  deported,  because 
he  did  evil  in  the  sight  of  Yahweh  and  broke  faith  with 


356       THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

the  king  of  Babylon;  II  Chron.  36:11  ff.;  II  Kings 
24:i8f. 

If  the  parallel  passages  above  cited  be  examined, 
it  will  be  found  that  the  Chronicler  finds  occasion  for 
criticism  in  five  more  cases  than  the  Deuteronomist, 
namely,  those  of  Asa,  Jehoash,  Amaziah,  Uzziah,  and 
Josiah,  in  four  of  which  misfortune  is  expressly  connected 
with  the  act  or  acts  condemned;  that  there  are  six 
other  cases,  namely,  those  of  Rehoboam,  Jehoshaphat, 
Jehoram,  Ahaziah,  Ahaz,  and  Josiah,  in  which,  although 
the  Deuteronomist  does  not  connect  misfortunes  that 
are  related  with  the  conduct  of  these  kings,  the  Chroni- 
cler makes  such  a  connection;  and  that  there  are  only 
three  cases,  namely,  those  of  Amon,  Jehoiakim,  and 
Jehoiachin,  in  which  the  older  narrative  is  not  modified 
in  this  respect. 

It  will  also  be  found  that,  in  the  passages  cited  from 
the  Books  of  Chronicles,  the  author  judges  the  persons 
involved  according  to  the  Priests'  Code,  which,  it  will 
be  remembered,  teaches  that  its  ritual  as  well  as  its 
moral  precepts  were  promulgated  at  Sinai,  and  that 
both  alike  are  binding  on  all  Hebrews.  Thus,  he  is 
just  as  severe  on  Uzziah  for  swinging  a  censer  as  on 
Manasseh  for  worshiping  idols  or  Jehoram  for  murdering 
his  own  brothers. 

The  Chronicler  betrays  his  ethical  position,  not  only 
in  his  modifications  of,  but  in  his  omissions  from,  the 
earlier  narratives.  Reference  has  already  been  made 
to  the  liberties  he  takes  with  the  accepted  accounts  of 
the  reigns  of  David  and  Solomon.  The  explanation  is 
easy.  David  had  long  been  the  national  hero.  The 
story  of  his  life  and  exploits  had  more  than  once  been 


CHRONICLES,  EZRA,  AND  NEHEMIAH         357 

rewritten,  and  deeds  that  he  had  done  suppressed, 
while  some  that  he  had  not  done  were  attributed  to  him. 
The  Chronicler  followed  the  same  method,  and  for  the 
same  reason,  as  his  predecessors.  He  was  interested 
in  the  temple  at  Jerusalem  and  all  that  pertained  to  it; 
so  deeply  interested  that  he  could  not  believe  David, 
the  national  idol,  to  have  left  the  honor  of  at  least  mak- 
ing all  possible  preparation  for  the  erection  of  the  sanc- 
tuary and  the  maintenance  of  worship  therein  to  his 
son  Solomon.  He  therefore  gave  the  king  credit,  not 
only  for  collecting  the  vast  amounts  of  gold  and  silver 
and  other  metals  above  noted,  but  for  organizing  the 
various  guilds  into  which  the  Levites  in  his  own  time 
were  divided.  On  the  other  hand,  because  the  ethics 
of  the  time  condemned  some  of  the  things  that  the  great 
king  had  done  or  permitted,  the  Chronicler  omitted, 
not  only  the  faults  of  which  he  stood  accused,  but  the 
misfortunes  which  would  naturally  be  interpreted  as 
penalties  for  unrecorded  transgressions.  He  made  one 
exception,  the  story  of  the  census  and  the  pestilence 
that  followed,  I  Chron.  21:1  ff.  This  passage  was 
doubtless  preserved  because  it  belonged  to  the  story 
of  the  temple,  and  the  compiler  thought  he  could  pre- 
vent the  reader  from  misusing  it  by  introducing,  as  the 
tempter,  instead  of  Yahweh,  Satan,  who  had  now 
become  a  definite  personality  hostile  to  God  and  his 
purposes. 

It  required  a  twofold  violence  to  transform  David 
from  a  very  real  man  into  a  very  unreal  saint.  The 
process  was  simpler  in  the  case  of  his  successor.  He 
had  always  enjoyed  the  honor  of  having  built  the 
temple    as    well    as    having    possessed    extraordinary 


358        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

wisdom.  It  was  therefore  only  necessary  for  the 
Chronicler  to  suppress  the  record  of  his  weakness  for 
foreign  women,  their  influence  over  him,  and  the 
adversaries  that  Yahweh  ''raised  up"  against  him, 
to  secure  for  him  also  recognition  as  a  saint  among 
those  for  whom  the  Books  of  Chronicles  were  written. 

Thus  far  the  object  has  been  to  present  the  Chroni- 
cler's general  position  as  a  teacher  of  morals  among  the 
Jews  in  the  early  part  of  the  third  century  B.C.  It 
remains  to  discuss  some  special  points  on  which  his 
work  furnishes  further  information. 

The  subject  of  slavery  is  one  of  them.  From  the 
earliest  times,  it  will  be  remembered,  there  were  native 
as  well  as  foreign  slaves  among  the  Hebrews,  the  former 
being  persons  who  were  held  in  bondage  for  a  limited 
period  for  debts  that  they  could  pay  only  by  personal 
service;^  but  there  was  a  tendency  to  make  the  lot 
of  all  such  unfortunates  as  tolerable  as  possible  under 
the  circumstances.^  Jeremiah  went  so  far  as  to  demand 
that  all  the  Hebrews  in  bondage  in  his  day  be  liberated 
and  that  thereafter  ''no  Jew  should  make  a  bondman 
of  his  brother,"  and  for  a  time  the  people  allowed  him 
to  have  his  way;  but  they  repented  of  their  humanity 
and  "caused  the  servants  and  the  handmaids  whom 
they  had  let  go  free  to  return"  to  subjection;^  and  it 
remained  for  Nehemiah  effectually  to  protest  against 
the  enslavement  of  Hebrews  for  debt.''  To  the  Chroni- 
cler, also,  the  idea  of  compulsory  service  for  Hebrews 
was  abhorrent.  Therefore  in  his  account  of  the  reign 
of  Solomon,  instead  of  adopting  the  statement  of  I 

»Exod.  2i:2ff.  3jer.  34:8ff. 

»Deut.  15:12  ff.;  Lev.  25:355.  ^Neh.  5:6ff. 


CHRONICLES,  EZRA,  AND  NEHEMIAH         359 

Kings  5:13  to  the  effect  that  the  men  by  whom  the 
wood  and  stone  required  for  the  temple  were  prepared 
and  transported  were  raised  by  "a  levy  out  of  all 
Israel,"  he  takes  pains  to  inform  his  readers  that  the 
153,600  men  so  employed  were  "the  sojourners  that 
were  in  the  land  of  Israel."  See  II  Chron.  2:17  f.; 
also  8:9,  where  he  copies  from  I  Kings  9:22  the  decla- 
ration that  "of  the  children  of  Israel  Solomon  made  no 
servants  for  his  work."  There  is  another  passage  that 
is  interesting  in  this  connection,  namely,  II  Chron. 
28:8  ff.,  which  tells  how,  when  Pekah  carried  away 
captive  from  Judah  200,000  women  and  children, 
whom  he  would  have  sold  into  slavery,  the  prophet 
Oded  protested  and  "certain  of  the  heads  of  the  children 
of  Ephraim"  forbade  him  to  bring  them  into  their 
country  for  that  purpose,  lest  Yahweh's  wrath  toward 
Israel  be  increased.  Here  the  Chronicler  is  simply 
carrying  back  more  than  four  centuries  the  opposition 
to  Hebrew  slavery  that  prevailed  in  the  Greek  period. 

In  this  connection  it  should  be  noted  that  in  the 
passage  cited  from  Nehemiah's  memoirs  the  governor 
appeals  to  the  Jews,  not  only  to  restore  the  security  they 
have  taken  from  one  another  for  debts,  but  to  cancel 
the  debts  themselves,  as  they  were  required  to  do  in  the 
year  of  release.' 

The  only  other  topic  that  requires  particular  atten- 
tion is  the  attitude  of  the  Chronicler  toward  foreigners. 
The  passages,  II  Chron.  2:i7f.  and  8:9,  in  which, 
following  I  Kings  9:22,  he  teaches  that  the  levy  raised 
by  Solomon  was  among  the  remnant  of  the  tribes 

»Neh.  5^9 ff-;  Deut.  15:1  ff.  In  Neh.  5:11,  for  "the  hundredth 
part"  read,  with  Geiger,  "the  loan."     See  Deut.  24:10. 


36o        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

subdued  by  the  Hebrews  when  they  invaded  Canaan, 
have  already  been  cited.  They  betray  an  attitude 
toward  Gentiles  that  becomes  more  pronounced  in  the 
Books  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah.  In  these  books,  to  be 
sure,  some  of  the  references  to  other  peoples  are  put 
into  the  mouths  of  the  principal  characters,  and  one  of 
them,  at  least,  must  have  come  from  some  source  not 
the  Chronicler,  but  the  passage  of  most  importance 
seems  to  be  from  his  pen.  It  is  the  tenth  chapter  of 
Ezra.  In  the  ninth,  as  in  the  eighth,  the  scribe  is 
represented  as  speaking  in  his  own  person,  a  fact  which 
favors  the  supposition  that  the  sentiments  there 
expressed  are  properly  attributed  to  him.  There  are 
those,  however,  who  insist  that  the  literary  form  of 
these  chapters  is  only  a  mask  behind  which  the  com- 
piler is  freely  drawing  upon  his  imagination.  There 
is  even  greater  reason  for  suspecting  something  of  the 
kind  in  chap.  lo,  where  the  form  of  the  memoir  is 
abandoned  and  the  narrative  proceeds  as  usual.  It  is 
probable,  therefore,  that  the  Jews  in  the  time  of  Ezra 
had  not  taken  foreign  wives  in  such  numbers  as  the 
Chronicler  would  have  one  believe,  or,  if  they  had, 
that  the  scribe  did  not  adopt  the  drastic  and  inhuman 
policy  of  dissolving  all  such  marriages  and  condemning 
hundreds  of  women  and  children  to  want  and  misery, 
especially  since,  according  to  Neh.  13 :  23,  the  governor 
in  a  precisely  similar  case  was  content  with  handling 
some  of  the  men  rather  roughly,  banishing  the  most 
prominent  offenders,  and  requiring  the  rest  to  promise 
under  oath  that  they  would  not  thenceforth  permit 
intermarriage  with  the  surrounding  peoples.  This 
being  the  case,  it  is  the  Chronicler,  and  not  Ezra,  who 


CHRONICLES,  EZRA,  AND  NEHEMIAH         361 

is  to  be  blamed;  and  the  sensitive  reader  will  condemn 
him  pretty  severely,  unless  he  stops  to  consider  that 
this  Chronicler  was  a  closet  historian,  who,  like  the 
Deuteronomic  reviser  of  the  Book  of  Joshua,  could 
calmly  describe  the  destruction  of  human  beings  by 
the  thousand,  but  might  have  shrunk  from  harming 
one  of  them,  except  with  his  pen.  For  further  indi- 
cations of  his  (literary)  attitude,  see  Ezra  6:21;  Neh. 
9:2;  10:28. 


CHAPTER  XXX 
THE  BOOK  OF  ECCLESIASTES 

In  i:i2  of  this  book  the  author  calls  himself  "the 
Preacher"  and  "king  over  Israel  in  Jerusalem."  In 
harmony  with  these  appellations  the  book  itself  is  de- 
scribed in  its  title  as  "The  Words  of  the  Preacher,  the 
son  of  David,  king  in  Jerusalem,"  and  in  the  past  it 
has  been  accepted  by  Christians  as  well  as  Jews  as  a 
work  of  Solomon.  The  evidence,  however,  from  both 
its  language  and  its  content  is  to  the  effect  that  the 
author  lived  in  the  Greek  period,  and  that  the  name  he 
assumes  is  a  literary  disguise  too  transparent  to  be 
taken  seriously.  This  much  is  generally  admitted. 
On  the  integrity  of  the  book  there  is  wide  difference 
of  opinion,  some  attributing  it  to  a  single  unstable 
author,  while  others  distribute  its  contents  among 
several  different  contributors.  The  safer  theory  seems 
to  be  that  the  deviations  from  the  geaeral  trend  of  the 
work,  which  it  is  easy  enough  to  discover,  are  due  to 
the  attempts  of  one  or  more  revisers  to  bring  it  into 
harmony  with  the  ethical  teaching  prevalent  in  their 
day,  or,  at  least,  in  the  class  or  party  to  which  they 
belonged. 

Perhaps  it  will  be  best  to  begin  the  examination 
of  the  book  with  the  interpolated  passages,  or  such  of 
them  as  have  an  ethical  bearing.  There  is  naturally 
nothing  new  in  them.  They  teach  the  simple  doctrines 
found  in  the  earlier  Hebrew  Scriptures.  In  the  first  place 
they  all  imply  the  righteousness   of  God,  and  7:29 

362 


THE  BOOK  OF  ECCLESIASTES  363 

asserts,  apparently  on  the  authority  of  Gen.  1:21,  that 
he  "made  man  upright."  He  holds  men  accountable 
for  their  actions.  He  will  bring  "into  judgment"  both 
the  righteous  and  the  wicked.^  There  is  no  hint  of  the 
sHghtest  doubt  about  the  outcome  of  the  trial.  The 
righteous  are  assured  that  their  righteousness  will  have 
its  reward  in  the  present  life;^  that,  in  fact,  "whoso 
keepeth  the  commandment  shall  know  nothing  evil."^ 
The  wicked,  on  the  other  hand,  are  as  confidently  warned 
that  they  are  always  exposed  to  evil,"*  and  that,  however 
often  they  may  escape,  they  cannot  hope  to  prolong  their 
days  Hke  the  righteous  or  enjoy  equally  certain  and 
enduring  prosperity .^ 

Such  is  the  teaching  of  the  reviser,  or  revisers,  to 
whose  well-meant  but  confusing  additions,  and  the 
potency  of  the  fame  of  Solomon,  the  book  doubtless 
owes  its  place  in  the  Hebrew  canon.  That  of  the 
original  writing  was  very  different.  Not  that  the 
author  denies  God,  or,  as  is  sometimes  inferred,  ignores 
moral  considerations.  He  repeatedly  recognizes  a 
divine  Cause.  It  is  God  to  whom  he  attributes  the 
frame  of  things  and  the  current  of  events  in  which  he 
finds  himself  involved,^  also  the  blessings  he  enjoys^ 
and  the  impulses  by  which  he  is  prompted  in  his  various 
activities.^  The  works  of  Gk)d,  although  he  cannot 
imderstand  them,  fill  him  with  awe,'  and,  when  he 
goes  to  the  house  of  God,  as  is  his  custom,  he  does 
so  with  a  hxmible  and  reverent  heart.'°    He  would  not 

^  Eccles.  3:17;   11:9b;  12:14.  ^  Eccles.  3:14  f.;   7:13  f. 

2  Eccles.  17:12,  i8b,  19.  '  Eccles.  5:19;  6:2. 

3  Eccles.  8:5.  *  Eccles.  1:13;  3:10. 

4  Eccles.  7:6.  9  Eccles.  3 :  14. 
s  Eccles.  2 :  26;  8 :  12.  «»  Eccles.  5:1!. 


364        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

willingly  offend  this  august  Being,  since,  if  he  did,  he 
would  expect  to  suffer,  and  that  severely,  from  his 
anger.' 

The  ethical  position  of  the  Preacher  is  more  diffi- 
cult to  determine.  He  certainly  cannot  be  accused  of 
conscious  neglect  of  moral  considerations.  On  the 
contrary,  he  clearly  distinguishes  between  the  righteous 
and  the  wicked,  and  more  than  once  protests  against 
the  neglect  of  this  distinction.^  He  is  so  sensitive  in 
this  regard,  and  criticizes  so  severely  the  morals  of  his 
day,  that  he  has  become  the  representative  of  pessimism 
in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures.  He  condenms  luxury  and 
intemperance.^  Naturally  the  abuses  most  character- 
istic of  the  Orient,  injustice  and  oppression,  receive 
special  attention.  He  laments  the  prevalence  of  wicked- 
ness among  judges  and  the  consequent  violence  to 
justice  and  equity ,"*  and  the  abuse  of  power  by  which 
rulers  make  life  intolerable  for  their  unfortunate  sub- 
jects.s  He  arraigns  mankind  in  general  in  7 :  20,  where 
he  complains  that  ^Hhere  is  not  a  righteous  man  on 
earth  that  doeth  good  and  sinneth  not,"  and  in  7:28, 
where,  after  teUing  how  earnestly  he  has  sought  men 
and  women  worthy  of  the  name,  he  declares,  "One 
man  among  a  thousand  have  I  found,  but  a  woman 
among  as  many  have  I  not  found." 

The  Preacher  in  his  researches  gave  thought,  not 
only  to  moral  but  to  physical  evils,  and  found  life 
everywhere  crossed  by  conditions  so  untoward  that  he 
was  tempted  to  think  it  hardly  worth  living.    Indeed, 

^  Eccles.  5 : 6  f.  *  Eccles.  3:16;  5:8, 

''Eccles.  7:i5f.;  8:14;  9:2!.  s  Eccles.  4:1;  also  5:8;  8:9. 

3  Eccles.  10:17. 


THE  BOOK  OF  ECCLESIASTES  365 

his  last  word,  after  he  has  rehearsed  the  disabilities  of 
old  age,  is  that  "all  is  vanity."  Now,  those  who  went 
before  him,  and  many,  no  doubt,  in  his  own  day,  would 
have  connected  the  ills  that  he  lamented  with  the 
decadence  of  morals  then  prevailing,  and  said  in  so 
many  words  that  he  and  the  rest  of  the  sufferers  were 
simply  paying  the  penalty  of  their  offenses  against  a 
righteous  God.  The  Preacher,  like  Job,  repudiates 
this  time-honored  doctrine.  He  declares  repeatedly 
that,  so  far  as  he  can  discover,  there  is  no  necessary 
connection  between  a  man's  character  and  his  earthly 
fortunes.  Thus,  he  says  of  the  righteous :  ''The  righteous 
and  the  wise  and  their  works  are  in  the  hand  of  God; 
whether  it  be  love  or  hatred  (that  they  will  procure  him 
from  his  Maker)  man  knoweth  not "  f  and  of  the  wicked : 
"I  have  seen  the  wicked  buried,  carried  even  from  the 
holy  place.  They  were  wont  to  go  about  boasting  in 
the  city  where  they  had  done  thus."^  There  are  two 
or  three  passages  in  which  their  uncertain  fates  are 
contrasted.  One  is  7:15:  ''There  is  a  righteous  man 
that  perisheth  in  his  righteousness,  and  there  is  a  wicked 
man  that  prolongeth  his  life  in  his  wickedness."  This 
statement  is  repeated  in  substance  in  8 :  14.  It  appears 
in  an  expanded  form  in  9 : 2,  where  the  Preacher  declares : 
"All  things  come  alike  to  all:  there  is  one  event  to  the 
righteous  and  to  the  wicked;  to  the  good  and  clean 
and  to  the  unclean;  to  him  that  sacrificeth  and  to  him 
that  sacrificeth  not;  as  is  the  good,  so  is  the  sinner,  and 
he  that  sweareth  as  he  that  feareth  an  oath."  This, 
he  adds,  is  so  great  an  evil  under  the  sun  that  "the 
hearts  of  the  sons  of  men  are  full  of  misfortune,  and 

^  Eccles.  9:1.  "  Eccles.  8:10. 


366        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

madness  is  in  their  hearts  while  they  hve,  and  their 
end  is  death." 

When  Job  found  himself  face  to  face  with  the 
problem  here  presented  he  was  deeply  troubled,  but  he 
took  counsel  of  the  divine  in  him  and  chose  to  suffer, 
even  die  an  outcast  from  his  kind,  rather  than  lose  the 
approval  of  his  conscience.  The  Preacher  was  not  a 
man  of  the  strenuous  t3^e.  This  is  clear  from  the 
confession  with  which  he  begins  his  book.  Thus,  he 
not  only  reckons  his  wealth  as  vanity  in  comparison 
with  the  "toil"  with  which  he  has  taxed  himself  in 
mind  and  body  to  acquire  it,  but  he  says  that  he  aban- 
doned the  search  for  wisdom  because  "in  wisdom  is 
much  grief,"  and  "he  that  increase th  knowledge  in- 
creaseth  sorrow";  an  excuse  which,  if  generally  adopted, 
would  prevent  further  progress  and  speedily  reduce 
mankind  to  barbarism. 

A  man  so  averse  to  exertion  could  hardly  be  expected 
to  have  and  maintain  a  high  ethical  standard.  He 
would,  of  course,  avoid  the  gross  vices  whose  folly  is 
unmistakable,  but,  when  the  path  of  virtue  was  rough 
or  thorny,  he  would  naturally  compromise  with  his 
conscience  and  take  an  easier  or  pleasanter  way.  In 
point  of  fact,  he  proclaims  this  his  policy  by  recom- 
mending it  to  his  readers  in  7:16  f.,  where  he  says: 
"Be  not  very  righteous,  neither  show  thyself  excessively 
wise:  why  shouldst  thou  ruin  thyself?  Be  not  very 
wicked,  neither  be  a  fool:  why  shouldst  thou  die  before 
thy  time?"  His  ideal  is  comfort.  He  admits  that 
the  world  is  not  so  constituted  as  to  permit  the  realiza- 
tion of  this  ideal,  but  there  is  comfort  to  be  enjoyed, 
and,  although  he  does  not  pretend  to  understand  the 


THE  BOOK  OF  ECCLESIASTES  367 

divine  mind,  he  is  able  to  convince  himself  that  it  is 
God's  will  that  men  should  get  out  of  life  as  much 
temperate  enjoyment  as  possible.  "There  is  nothing 
better  for  a  man/'  he  says  in  2:24f.,  "than  that  he 
should  eat  and  drink,  and  give  himself  enjo5anent  in 
his  toil;  ....  it  is  the  gift  of  God;  for  who  can  eat, 
or  who  can  enjoy,'  apart  from  him?"^  He  naturally 
counts  one  especially  fortunate  whom  God  permits 
to  enjoy  life  to  the  end.  "Behold,"  he  exclaims, 
"what  I  have  seen!  a  good  that  is  beautiful:  it  is  to 
eat  and  drink,  and  see  enjoyment,  in  all  the  labor  that 
one  does  under  the  sun,  all  the  days  of  the  life  that  God 
giveth  one;  for  it  is  one's  portion.  Every  man,  also, 
to  whom  God  hath  given  wealth  and  riches,  and  power 
to  eat  thereof,  and  take  his  portion,  and  rejoice  in  his 
toil — this  is  the  gift  of  God."^  He  warns  his  readers, 
however,  that  few  can  expect  to  enjoy  themselves 
except  in  their  youth.^  The  whole  thought  is  more 
fully  and  attractively  set  forth  in  9:7-10,  where  he 
counsels  them:  "Go,  eat  with  joy  thy  bread,  and  drink 
with  a  merry  heart  thy  wine,  for  already  hath  God 
accepted  thy  works.  Let  thy  garments  always  be 
white,  and  let  there  be  no  lack  of  oil  on  thy  head. 
Enjoy  life  with  a  woman  that  thou  lovest,  all  the  days 
of  the  vain  hfe  that  God  hath  given  thee  under  the  sun, 
for  it  is  thy  portion  in  Hfe  and  in  the  labor  that  thou 
hast  to  do  imder  the  sun.  Everything  that  thy  hand 
findeth  to  do,  do  with  thy  might,  for  there  is  no  work, 

» The  Greek  Version  has  "drink." 

*  The  Greek  reading;  see  also  Eccles.  3: 12  f.,  22. 

3  Eccles.  s :  18  f .    See  also  8:15. 

4  Eccles.  11:8. 


368        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

or  device,  or  knowledge,  or  wisdom  in  Sheol,  whither 
thou  art  going.'* 

The  words  just  quoted  sound  so  much  like  the 
teaching  of  Epicurus  that  the  author  of  them  has  been 
supposed  to  have  been  a  disciple  of  that  philosopher; 
but  it  appears  that  the  same  ideas  were  current  among 
the  Babylonians  centuries  before  the  Greeks  had  a 
philosophy,  being  found  in  a  fragment  from  the  famous 
epic  of  Gilgamesh  on  a  tablet  supposed  to  be  as  old  as 
2000  B.C.,  which  reads  as  follows: 

Since  the  gods  created  man, 
Death  they  ordained  for  man, 
Life  in  their  hands  they  hold, 
':  Thou,  O  Gilgamesh,  fill  indeed  thy  belly. 

Day  and  night  be  thou  joyful, 
Daily  ordain  gladness. 
Day  and  night  rage  and  be  merry. 
'  Let  thy  garments  be  bright, 
Thy  head  purify,  wash  with  water. 
Desire  thy  children,  which  thy  hand  possesseth, 
A  wife  enjoy  in  thy  bosom, 
Peaceably  thy  work  .... 

It  is  now  tolerably  clear  what  is  the  significance 
of  the  Book  of  Ecclesiastes  in  the  history  of  Hebrew 
ethics.  The  original  author  represents  those  who, 
like  Job,  could  no  longer  believe  that  men  received 
their  just  deserts  on  earth,  but  who  were  so  lacking  in 
appreciation  for  the  unseen  and  spiritual  that,  instead 
of  taking  refuge  in  the  hope  of  immortaHty,  as  others 
were  doing,  they  abandoned  the  problem  of  retribution 
and  adopted  a  makeshift  theory  of  life  ethically  not 
much  better  than  that  of  the  primitive  Semites  of 
Babylonia. 


CHAPTER  XXXI 

THE  BOOKS  OF  DANIEL  AND  ESTHER 

I.    DANIEL 

The  unity  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  has  been,  and  still 
is,  denied,  some,  with  Torrey,  dividing  it  between  two 
authors,  while  others,  Hke  Barton,  find  traces  of  several 
(5)  different  hands  in  its  composition;  but  there  are 
good  reasons  for  regarding  it,  with  the  exception,  per- 
haps, of  9:4-20  and  a  few  other  verses,  as  the  work  of 
a  single  writer,  and  this  view  will  here  be  taken  for 
granted. 

No  one  can  read  the  book  without  being  struck  with 
the  prominence  given  therein  to  the  sovereignty  of  the 
God  of  the  Hebrews.  On  his  first  appearance  as  an 
interpreter  of  dreams  Daniel  takes  occasion  to  tell 
Nebuchadrezzar  that  "the  kingdom,  and  the  strength, 
and  the  glory"  which  he  enjoys  were  given  him  by  "the 
God  of  heaven,"'  and  later  he  predicts  that  the  king 
will  have  to  "eat  grass  Hke  oxen"  until  he  knows  that 
"the  Most  High  ruleth  in  the  kingdom  of  men  and 
giveth  it  to  whomsoever  he  will."^  Nebuchadrezzar 
finally,  says  the  story,  recognized  the  God  of  Daniel  as 
the  Supreme  Ruler,^  and  so  did  Darius  the  Mede,^ 
while  Belshazzar,  because  he  "humbled  not"  his  heart 
before  Yahweh,  perished  in  his  obstinacy.  The  same 
doctrine  is  taught  in  the  second  part  of  the  book.s 

^  Dan.  2:37.  3  Dan.  4:37. 

2  Dan.  4:15.  •♦Dan.  6:26. 

5  Dan.  7:12;  8:25;  9:27;  11:36,45. 

369 


370        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

This,  however,  is  not  all,  for  Nebuchadrezzar  con- 
fesses, not  only  that  Yahweh  "doeth  according  to  his 
will  in  the  army  of  heaven  and  among  the  inhabitants 
of  the  earth,"'  but  that  "all  his  works  are  truth  and 
his  ways  are  justice."*  In  7 : 9  ff.  the  justice  of  Yahweh 
is  presented  in  a  picture  representing  him  as  sitting  in 
judgment  on  the  beast  with  eleven  horns  the  last  of 
which  has  "a  mouth  speaking  great  things."  The 
beast  is  condemned  to  destruction,  and  the  dominion 
and  glory  that  it  has  enjoyed  are  given  to  "one  like  a 
son  of  man,"  who,  as  is  explained  in  vs.  18,  represents 
"the  saints  of  the  Most  High."  From  vs.  27  it  appears 
that  by  the  saints  is  meant  the  Jewish  people,  or  the 
better  among  them,  and  from  4:27  that  the  prime 
requisites  of  sainthood  would  be  righteousness  and 
mercy  to  the  poor. 

The  author  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  teaches  that  God 
holds  men  and  nations  responsible  for  their  conduct? 
but  he  does  not  attempt  to  maintain  that  the  good  and 
evil  which  they  experience  in  this  life  are  an  infallible 
indication  of  their  moral  standing.  He  knows  that  the 
righteous  sometimes  suffer  in  spite  of  their  righteous- 
ness, while  the  wicked  as  often  prosper  in  their  wicked- 
ness. He  meets  this  seeming  injustice  in  the  divine 
governmeat,  first,  by  assigning  to  suffering  a  refining 
and  purifying  efficacy,^  and  second,  by  proclaiming  a 
resurrection  after  which  the  righteous  will  enjoy  "ever- 
lasting life"  and  the  wicked  suffer  "shame  and  ever- 
lasting contempt. "4  The  resurrection  promised,  to 
be  sure,  is  not  a  general  release  from  Sheol,  but  the 

^  Dan.  4:35.  3  Dan.  11:35;  12:10. 

"Dan.  4:37.  <  Dan.  12:2. 


THE  BOOKS  OF  DANIEL  AND  ESTHER         371 

adoption  of  this  restricted  doctrine  marked  an  epoch 
in  the  history  of  Hebrew  ethics  and  prepared  the  way 
for  a  more  complete  relief  from  the  perplexity  with 
which  thinking  men  were  haunted  so  long  as  they  tried 
to  believe  that  the  righteous  were  rewarded  and  the 
wicked  punished  as  they  deserved  in  this  life. 

The  revelation  of  a  future  life  was  a  great  boon 
to  the  Jews  from  the  intellectual  standpoint,  but  it  was 
much  more  than  the  solution  of  a  troublesome  ethical 
problem.  They  were  at  the  time  engaged  in  a  life-and- 
death  struggle  for  their  existence  as  a  people.  Antiochus 
Epiphanes  had  invaded  their  coimtry,  desecrated  their 
temple,  and  undertaken  to  impose  upon  them  a  foreign 
religion.  Some  had  submitted,  forsaking  "the  holy 
covenant"  and  joining  themselves  to  the  heathen.^ 
The  rest  had  revolted  with  Mattathias  of  Modin,  and 
were  now,  under  his  son  Judas,  fighting  for  their  country 
and  their  religion.  It  was  during  this  remarkable  con- 
flict, when  the  little  band  of  patriots  had  been  further 
weakened  by  death  and  desertion,  that  the  Book  of 
Daniel  must  have  been  written.  The  object  of  the 
author  evidently  was  to  inspire  and  encourage  his  people 
to  continue  the  struggle.  To  this  end  he  tells  them  how 
steadfastly  Daniel  and  his  friends  resisted  the  tempta- 
tion to  disloyalty  to  which  they  were  exposed.  To  this 
end,  too,  he  pictures  the  passing  of  the  nations,  as  they 
are  one  after  another  swept  from  the  scene  by  the 
mighty  hand  of  Yahweh.  Finally,  it  was  the  need  of 
an  inducement  strong  enough  to  make  men  face  almost 
certain  death  that  forced  him  to  search  the  future  for 
the  promise  of  another  life,  a  Kfe  in  which  those  who 

» I  Mace.  1:15,  43. 


372        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

offered  themselves  for  their  country  would  be  crowned 
with  glory  and  those  who  betrayed  it  would  be  covered 
with  ignominy;  and  there  can  be  little  doubt  that  this 
doctrine  had  its  effect  in  producing  the  zeal,  and  the 
courage,  and  the  fortitude  by  which  the  Jews  finally 
expelled  their  Syrian  oppressors  and  achieved  their 
independence. 

2.     ESTHER 

The  Book  of  Esther  is  another  product  of  the  late 
period  in  which  that  of  Daniel  was  written,  but  it  is  of 
a  very  different  character.  In  the  first  place,  while,  as 
has  been  shown,  Daniel  is  permeated  with  faith  in  God 
and  his  sovereignty,  Esther  refers  everything  that  is 
done,  even  the  deliverance  of  the  Jews  from  the  massacre 
with  which  they  were  threatened,  almost  entirely  to 
human  wit  and  power.  Indeed,  throughout  the  book 
the  divine  name  is  not  once  mentioned.  The  dominant 
figure  is  the  Persian  king  Ahasuerus,  the  Xerxes  of 
profane  history.  He  is  represented  as  a  despot  and 
sensualist  who  gives  no  hint  of  a  recognition  of  moral 
responsibility  in  either  his  private  life  or  his  relations 
to  his  subjects.  The  rest  of  the  characters  are  the  nat- 
ural product  of  such  a  court  as  he  would  maintain. 
Haman  is  the  t3^ical  favorite  of  an  oriental  monarch, 
vain,  jealous,  and  unprincipled.  Vashti  at  first  makes 
a  favorable  impression,  but,  when  one  remembers  that, 
in  the  eyes  of  the  Persians,  it  would  have  been  perfectly 
proper  for  her  to  appear  at  the  feast  given  by  her  hus- 
band, it  seems  probable  that  the  author  intended  to 
convey  the  impression  that  her  refusal  to  obey  the  royal 
summons  was  dictated,  not  by  modesty  or  dignity,  but 
by  the  caprice  or  wantonness  of  a  spoiled  plaything. 


THE  BOOKS  OF  DANIEL  AND  ESTHER         373 

There  is  almost  as  little  to  say  for  the  two  characters 
for  whom  the  author  evidently  expected  to  obtain  the 
approval  of  his  readers.  Mordecai  is  a  sycophant  who 
sacrifices  his  adopted  daughter  to  royal  lust  for  the  sake 
of  improving  his  position  at  court,  and,  when  through 
Esther  he  has  won  the  vizierate,  proves  himself  hardly 
less  cruel  and  vindictive  than  the  man  he  displaced. 
Finally,  Esther  herself  is  not  to  be  commended,  even 
when  she  is  judged  by  the  standard  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. There  is  nothing  to  indicate  that  she  shrank 
from  paying  the  price  of  her  cousin's  advancement.  On 
the  other  hand,  she  did  what  she  could  to  further  his 
plans,  at  first  by  keeping  secret  her  origin,^  and  later, 
when  she  was  sure  of  her  power  over  the  king,  by  recog- 
nizing him  as  a  kinsman.^  It  was,  indeed,  brave  in  her 
to  take  her  life  in  her  hand  and  enter  the  inner  court  of 
the  king's  house  without  being  summoned  to  an  inter- 
view; but  this  act  was  not  worthy  of  so  great  praise  as 
it  has  received,  since  it  was  not  done  on  her  own  initia- 
tive or  from  interest  in  or  sympathy  for  others,  but  at 
Mordecai's  urgent  command,  and  only  after  he  had 
warned  her  that  she  herself  was  in  imminent  peril  and 
could  not  hope  to  escape  unless  she  espoused  the  cause 
of  her  people.  If,  however,  her  conduct  in  this  instance 
can  be  too  highly  commended,  what  shall  one  say  of  the 
proclamation,  dictated  by  Mordecai,  in  which  the 
Jews  were  granted  permission,  not  only  to  defend  them- 
selves if  attacked,  but,  turning  the  tables  on  their  oppres- 
sors, to  kill  and  destroy  them  with  their  wives  and 
children,  and  take  their  goods  as  booty;  and  of  Esther's 
reply,  when  the  king  told  her  how  many  of  his  people 

»  Esther  2 :  10,  20.  » Esther  8:1. 


374        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

had  been  slaughtered  on  the  day  appointed  and  asked 
her  what  he  could  still  do  to  please  her:  "If  it  please 
the  king,  let  it  be  granted  to  the  Jews  that  are  in  Shu- 
shan,  to  do  tomorrow  also  according  to  this  day's  decree, 
and  let  Haman's  sons  be  hanged  on  the  gallows' 7' 
There  are  many  "hard  sayings"  in  the  Old  Testament, 
but  for  malice  and  cruelty  there  is  none  that  is  more 
abhorrent  to  the  humane  reader  than  this  heartless  peti- 
tion. Nor  is  its  moral  character  affected  by  the  fact, 
now  generally  recognized,  that  the  Book  of  Esther  is 
not  a  historical  work,  in  other  words,  that  Queen  Esther 
is  a  fictitious  character.  It  still  remains  true  that  the 
personaUty  here  portrayed  embodies  the  hatred  and 
revenge  with  which  the  Jews  of  the  second  century 
before  the  Christian  era  regarded  their  oppressors,  and 
that  the  book  of  which  she  is  the  heroine  has  since  that 
time,  through  the  use  made  of  it  in  the  synagogue,  at 
the  feast  of  Purim,  kept  alive  the  bitter  memory  of  their 
real  wrongs  and  excited  jealousy  and  hostility  toward 
other  peoples  for  which  there  was  often  no  foundation. 
It  is,  of  course,  idle  to  attempt  to  maintain  that  a  book 
so  unprofitable  "for  instruction  in  righteousness"  is 
"inspired  of  God"  or  deserves  the  place  it  occupies 
among  the  sacred  writings  of  the  Christian  church. 

'Esther  9:13. 


CHAPTER  XXXII 
THE  BOOK  OF  PSALMS 

The  ethical  note  in  the  Psalms  is  unmistakable  and 
persistent.  It  is  prominent  in  the  very  first,  where  the 
righteous  and  the  wicked  are  contrasted  and  their 
diverse  fates  clearly  distinguished : 

Yahweh  regardeth  the  way  of  the  righteous, 

But  the  way  of  the  wicked  leadeth  to  destruction.'' 

The  righteousness  of  Yahweh  is  repeatedly  asserted. 
Not  that  the  adjective  "righteous,"  as  applied  to  him, 
is  of  frequent  occurrence.  It  is,  however,  found  in 
several  passages.  Thus,  it  is  used  as  a  predicate  in 
11:7;  119:137;  129:4;  and,  with  the  titles  "God" 
and  "Judge,"  in  vss.  9  and  11  of  Ps.  7.  Add  the  cases 
in  which  it  is  applied  to  the  laws  of  Yahweh,  namely, 
119:62,  116,  137,  164,  172.  In  11:7  it  is  said  of  him, 
not  only  that  he  himself  is  righteous,  but  that  "he 
loveth  righteousness,"  and  in  97:2  (89:14)  that 

Righteousness  and  Justice  are  the  foundation  of  his  throne.' 

Moreover,  the  righteousness  of  Yahweh,  besides  being 
an  essential  feature  of  his  character  and  government, 
surpasses  in  excellence  even  the  comprehension  of  his 
creatures.     Thus,  the  author  of  36 : 6  says, 

Thy  righteousness  is  like  the  mountains  of  God, 

Thy  judgments  are  a  great  deep.3 

Another  in  119:142  declares. 

Thy  righteousness  is  forever  righteous, 

^Ps.  1:6. 

="  See  also  Pss.  9:4;  33:5;  37:28.  3  See  also  Ps.  7:19. 

375 


376        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

by  which  he  means  that  this  attribute  in  God  is  an 
inexhaustible  source  of  righteous  activity.  The  descrip- 
tion is  completed  by  97 : 6,  where  one  reads  that 

Heaven  declareth  his  righteousness, 
And  all  the  peoples  have  seen  his  glory. 

Reference  has  already  been  made  to  7:11,  where 
God  appears  as  a  judge.  His  judicial  activity  is  very 
prominent  in  the  Psalms,  and  he  is  represented  as 
exercising  it,  not  only  in  Jacob,'  but  throughout  the 
earth  and  among  its  multitudinous  peoples.^  In  Ps.  9  he 
appears  in  the  act  of  administering  justice  among  men: 

Yahweh  sitteth  enthroned  forever; 
He  hath  set  up  his  throne  for  judgment, 
And  he  judgeth  the  world  in  righteousness, 
Decideth  among  the  nations  with  equity .3 

Since  Yahweh  himself  is  righteous,  and  loves 
righteousness,  in  his  capacity  as  judge  he  cannot  but 
render  "to  every  man  according  as  he  acteth,""*  reward- 
ing those  that  meet  the  ethical  test  and  punishing 
those  that  fail  to  measure  up  to  its  requirements. 
This  thought  appears  in  the  Psalms  many  times  and 
in  a  great  variety  of  forms.  The  last  verse  of  the  first 
has  already  been  quoted.  The  same  doctrine  is  more 
fully  stated  in  34 :  15  f . : 

The  eyes  of  Yahweh  are  toward  the  righteous, 
And  his  ears  inclined  to  their  cry. 
The  face  of  Yahweh  is  against  evil-doers, 
Cutting  off  the  memory  of  them  from  the  earth. 

See  also  ii:6f.;  75:10;  92:7,  12;  125:4^;  145:20; 
147:6;  and,  finally,  58:10  f.,  where  the  truth  the  writer 

^Ps.  99:4.  3  Ps.  9:7  f.;  see  also  67:4. 

"Ps.  105:7.  <Ps.  62:12. 


THE  BOOK  OF  PSALMS  377 

wished  to  teach  is  marred  by  the  spirit  in  which  it  is 
presented;  for  this  is  the  passage  that  reads: 

The  righteous  will  rejoice  when  he  beholdeth  vengeance. 
He  will  wash  his  feet  in  the  blood  of  the  wicked; 
And  men  shall  say,  Surely  there  is  reward  for  the  righteous, 
Verily  there  is  a  God  that  judgeth  in  the  earth. 

The  testimony  of  the  Psalms  is  overwhelmingly  to 
the  effect  that  there  is  a  God,  and  that  he  discriminates 
among  his  creatures,  rewarding  the  righteous  and  punish- 
ing the  wicked.  There  is  little  evidence  of  dissent  from 
this  belief.  Still,  there  are  passages  showing  that, 
when  they  were  written,  there  were  some  who  practically, 
if  not  explicitly,  rejected  it.  "The  fool,"  says  14:1 
(53:1),  "saith  in  his  heart.  There  is  no  God."  This 
declaration  should  probably  be  interpreted  in  the  light 
of  10:4,  where  "There  is  no  God"  is  the  equivalent  of 
"He  will  not  call  to  account."  In  other  words,  the 
character  in  question  does  not  question  the  existence 
of  God,  but  refuses  to  believe  that  the  Deity  will  take 
note  of  his  conduct,  or,  if  he  does,  will  punish  him  for 
any  deviation  from  rectitude.' 

The  author  of  94:7  treats  the  idea  suggested  as 
ridiculous. =*  He  insists  that  righteousness  will  eventu- 
ally triumph  and  the  upright  be  content  with  their 
choice.^  There  were,  however,  among  the  just  those 
who  sometimes  doubted  the  current  teaching  on  the 
subject  of  retribution.  This  appears  in  such  appeals 
as  35:23ff.;  44:235.;  88:14;  139:19^;  and  the  horta- 
tory refrain  in  Pss.  42  and  43.  In  Ps.  73  has  been  pre- 
served what  purports  to  be  a  record  of  the  experience 

*  See  also  Pss.  10:13;  36:1;  94:7.  3  Ps.  94:15. 

"Ps.  94:8f. 


378        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

of  one  of  these  righteous  souls,  an  experience  that 
is  too  natural  not  to  have  been  shared  by  many  Jews 
of  the  post-exihc  period.  The  writer  tells  how  his 
faith,  or  that  of  the  class  he  represents,  was  shaken, 
when  he  "saw  the  prosperity  of  the  wicked, '''  who  not 
only  had  "more  than  heart  could  wish,"='  but  reviled 
God  and  man.^  He  was  almost  ready  to  admit  that 
he  had  taken  useless  pains  to  keep  his  hands  and  his 
heart  clean,  to  say  nothing  of  the  trials  his  faithfulness 
had  cost  him,4  and  it  was  only  when  he  "went  to  the 
sanctuary  of  God,  and  considered  their  fate,"^  took  a 
wider  survey  of  life,  that  he  was  able  to  recover  his 
spiritual  footing.  It  was  doubtless  the  recurrence  of 
such  cases  that  prompted  someone  whose  faith  was  still 
undisturbed  to  undertake  a  more  elaborate  defence  of 
the  imperiled  doctrine.  The  result  was  Ps.  37,  where 
the  writer  repeatedly  declares  his  belief  in  the  ethical 
character  of  the  divine  government.  The  following 
are  some  of  the  antithetical  statements  into  which  he 
puts  his  convictions  in  the  matter: 

Evil-doers  shall  be  cut  off, 

But  they  that  wait  for  Yahweh  shall  inherit  the  land.* 

The  arms  of  the  wicked  shall  be  broken, 
But  Yahweh  upholdeth  the  righteous.' 

Yahweh  regardeth  the  days  of  the  perfect, 
And  their  inheritance  shall  be  everiasting.' 


The  wicked  shall  perish, 

And  the 

enemies  of  Yahweh  shall  be  as  the  fat  of 

lambs." 

1 

Ps.  73:2f. 

4Ps.  73:i3f.                   'Ps.  37:17. 

'Ps.  73:7. 

sPs.  73:17.                   '«Ps.  37:18. 

^Ps.  73:9. 

''Ps.  37:9.                       9 Ps.  37:20a. 

THE  BOOK  OF  PSALMS  379 

Yahweh  loveth  justice, 

And  forsaketh  not  his  saints; 

They  are  preserved  forever, 

But  the  seed  of  the  wicked  shall  be  cut  off.' 

Wait  for  Yahweh,  and  keep  his  way. 
And  he  will  exalt  thee  to  inherit  the  land: 
When  the  wicked  are  cut  off  thou  shalt  see  it.' 

Preserve  integrity  and  cherish  uprightness, 
For  the  peaceable  man  hath  a  posterity; 
But  transgressors  shall  all  be  destroyed, 
The  issue  of  the  wicked  shall  be  cut  off.3 

He  puts  his  personal  experience  into  a  corresponding 
form: 

I  have  been  young,  and  have  become  old, 
Yet  have  I  not  seen  the  righteous  forsaken. 
Or  his  seed  begging  bread.4 

I  have  seen  the  wicked  exultant, 

And  uplifting  himself  like  a  cedar  of  Lebanon; 

But  I  passed  by,  and  lo,  he  was  gone. 

Yea,  I  sought  him,  and  he  was  not  to  be  found.s 

This  confession  of  faith  could  hardly  be  made 
stronger.  One  cannot,  however,  read  the  psalm  with- 
out being  impressed  by  the  difference  between  it  and 
earlier  declarations  on  the  same  subject.  Its  author 
sees  clearly  that  the  righteous  sometimes  suffer,  while 
the  wicked  as  often  escape  misfortune;  but,  instead  of 
protesting,  as  did  Job  at  the  start,  and  rashly  charging 
God  with  injustice,  or  disparaging  human  virtue,  as 
did  Job's  friends  to  the  last,  to  save  the  credit  of  the 

»Ps.  37:28.  '♦Ps.  37:25. 

"Ps.  37:34.  sPs.  37:35  f. 

3Ps.  37:37f. 


380        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

Almighty,  he  simply  does  what  Job  was  finally  forced 
to  do,  accepts  the  facts  as  they  present  themselves  and 
trusts  Yahweh  to  vindicate  his  own  character.  This 
is  the  course  that  he  recommends  to  any  who  are 
inclined  to  worry  about  the  reliability  of  the  moral 
order: 

Trust  in  Yahweh  and  do  good; 

Dwell  in  the  land,  and  cherish  faithfulness: 

Yea,  take  thy  delight  in  Yahweh, 

And  he  will  give  thee  thy  heart's  desires. 

Commit  to  Yahweh  thy  way. 

Trust  also  in  him,  and  he  will  bring  to  pass: 

He  will  even  bring  forth  thy  righteousness  as  the  light 

And  thy  justice  as  the  noonday.^ 

There  is  in  this  psalm  nothing  to  indicate  how  long 
the  righteous  must  wait  for  Yahweh  to  reward  them 
and  punish  those  who  deserve  punishment,  but  the 
writer  seems  to  have  expected  the  account  to  be  settled 
in  this  Ufe.  The  author  of  Ps.  9  represents  the  Deity  as 
continually  exercising  his  judicial  functions  with  respect 
to  nations  as  well  as  individuals.  See  especially  vss.  7  f . 
In  some  of  the  other  psalms  there  are  indications  of  the 
expectation  of  what  the  prophets  call  ''the  Day  of 
Yahweh,"  a  date,  known  only  to  Yahweh,  when  the 
righteous  will  be  delivered,  and  the  wicked,  especially 
foreign  enemies,  destroyed.  This  is  probably  the 
"judgment"  of  1:5.  When  it  comes,  according  to 
7:6-8,  Yahweh  will  reveal  himself  in  all  his  majesty 
to  the  assembled  peoples.  The  righteous,  since  they 
were  to  be  vindicated,  naturally  looked  forward  to  the 
occasion  with  eagerness.    Hence,  it  is  not  surprising  to 

*Ps.  37:3-6. 


THE  BOOK  OF  PSALMS  381 

find  that  Pss.  96  and  98,  which  are  among  the  most 
joyful  in  the  collection,  end  with  the  explanatory  lines, 

For  he  cometh  to  judge  the  earth: 

He  will  judge  the  world  in  righteousness, 

And  the  peoples  with  equity.^ 

There  is  not,  however,  in  them  any  trace  of  the  conceit 
or  bitterness  by  which  some  of  the  other  psalms  are 
marred.  Indeed,  in  both  "all  the  earth"  is  invited  to 
take  part  in  the  "new  song "  to  Yahweh.  In  Ps.  149 : 7  f., 
on  the  other  hand,  the  author  not  only  betrays  a  venge- 
ful spirit,  but  represents  the  saints  as  commissioned  by 
Yahweh 

To  wreak  vengeance  upon  the  nations, 

Chastisements  upon  the  peoples; 

To  bind  their  kings  with  chains, 

And  their  nobles  with  fetters  of  iron. 

This  passage  is  important,  because  the  fact  that  the 
saints  execute  the  "prescribed  penalty"^  with  "a  two- 
edged  sword  "3  shows  that  the  author  had  in  mind  a 
judgment  on  the  hither  side  of  the  grave.  There  is 
nowhere  in  the  Psalms  proof  that  the  Jews  of  the  period 
to  which  they  belong  followed  the  wicked  beyond  the 
confines  of  this  world.  In  the  case  of  the  righteous  it  is 
different.  Not  that  there  is  much  evidence  of  beHef 
in  their  future  blessedness.  Indeed,  most  of  the  passages 
that  can  be  quoted  on  the  subject  have  a  contrary  import. 
The  following  are  especially  significant: 

In  death  there  is  no  remembrance  of  thee; 
In  Sheol  who  will  give  thee  thanks  ?^ 

^  In  Ps.  96: 13,  "in  his  faithfulness."  3  Ps.  149:6. 

2 Ps.  149:9.  '♦Ps.  6:5. 


382        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

What  profit  is  there  in  my  blood  when  I  go  down  into 
the  pit  ? 

Will  the  dust  praise  thee  ?  will  it  declare  thy  faith- 
fulness ?^ 

Wilt  thou  do  wonders  for  the  dead  ? 

Will  the  shades  arise  and  praise  thee  ? 

Will  thy  kindness  be  recounted  in  the  grave, 

Thy  faithfulness  in  Abaddon  ? 

Will  thy  wonders  be  acknowledged  in  the  darkness, 

And  thy  righteousness  in  the  land  of  f orgetf ulness  ?* 

The  dead  praise  not  Yahweh, 

Neither  any  that  go  down  into  the  dust.3 

Nor  can  all  the  passages  that  have  been  supposed  to 
teach  this  doctrine  properly  be  so  interpreted.  One  of 
them  is   i6:iof.,  which,  in  the  Authorized  Version, 

reads : 

Thou  wilt  not  leave  my  soul  in  hell; 

Neither  wilt   thou  suffer  thine  holy  one  to  see 

corruption. 
Thou  wilt  show  me  the  path  of  life: 
In  thy  presence  is  fulness  of  joy; 
At  thy  right  hand  there  are  pleasures  for  evermore. 

The  revised  rendering  is  an  improvement.     It  reads : 
Thou  wilt  not  leave  my  soul  to  Sheol; 
Neither  wilt  thou  suffer  thy  holy^  one  to  see  cor- 
ruption. 
Thou  wilt  show  me  the  path  of  life: 
In  thy  presence  is  fulness  of  joy; 
In  thy  right  hand  there  are  pleasures  for  evermore. 

This  also,  however,  is  unsatisfactory,  since  it  is  still 
possible  to  understand  "leave  ....  to  Sheol "  as  mean- 

»Ps.  30:9.  ''Ps.  88:10-12.  3  Ps.  115:17. 

*  Margin:  "Oi,  godly,  Oi,  beloved.    Another  reading  is,  My  o««j." 


THE  BOOK  OF  PSALMS  383 

ing  "leave  ....  in  Sheol,"  whereas  from  vs.  9  it  is 
clear  that  the  proper  interpretation  is  "abandon  .... 
to  Sheol,"  that  is,  permit  to  die. 

A  similar  case  is  that  of  17:15,  which  may  be  trans- 
lated, 

I  myself  will  behold  thy  face  in  righteousness, 
I  will  sate  myseM,  when  I  awake,  on  thy  image. 

When  thus  rendered,  especially  if  vs.  13  be  taken  into 
account,  it  becomes  clear  that  the  author  of  the  psalm 
was  thinking,  not  of  a  future  life,  but  of  the  next  morn- 
ing and  the  service  at  the  national  sanctuary. 

Duhm  thinks  he  finds  the  doctrine  of  future  blessed- 
ness in  39 : 7 ;  but  he  can  defend  this  interpretation  only 
by  rejecting  four  verses  of  the  psalm,  the  last  of  which, 
vs.  13,  directly  contradicts  it. 

It  is  not  so  easy  to  answer  those  who  find  the  doctrine 
in  question  in  Pss.  49  and  73.  In  vss.  13-15  of  the 
former  the  fate  of  the  wicked  is  contrasted  with  that 
of  the  righteous.  The  passage  in  its  original  form 
probably  read  about  as  follows: 

This  is  the  way  of  those  that  are  foolish, 

And  the  end  of  those  that  are  pleased  with  their  lot: 

Like  a  flock  they  vanish  in  Sheol; 

Death  feedeth  them  and  ruleth  over  them; 

Soon  their  forms  moulder, 

Sheol  is  their  abode. 

But  God  will  redeem  my  soul 

From  the  power  of  Sheol,  for  he  will  take  me. 

Perhaps,  however,  the  last  line  should  read. 

From  the  power  of  Sheol  he  will  take  me. 

The  author  of  Ps.  73  dwells,  in  vss.  23-26,  on  his  hopes 
as  one  of  God^s  chosen: 


384        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

I  am  continually  with  thee; 

Thou  holdest  my  right  hand. 

Thou  wilt  guide  me  by  thy  counsel, 

And  afterward  take  me  to  glory. 

Whom  have  I  in  heaven  besides  thee? 

And  there  is  none  on  earth  in  whom  I  delight  as 

in  thee. 
My  flesh  a*nd  my  heart  fail, 
But  God  is  my  portion  for  ever. 

The  problem  is  the  same  as  in  Ps.  37 — ^it  was  inevitable 
that  someone  would  again  attack  it — but  the  result  is 
different;  for  it  seems  clear  that,  in  these  psalms,  while 
death  to  the  wicked  is  a  penalty  for  their  transgressions, 
to  the  righteous  it  is  a  translation  from  a  scene  of  uncer- 
tain conditions  to  a  state  of  undisturbed  happiness  in  the 
immediate  presence  of  God.' 

Thus  far  the  terms  ^'righteous"  and  "righteousness," 
when  applied  to  God,  have  had  impartial  reference  to 
men  in  general,  whether  righteous  or  wicked.  There 
are  many  passages  in  which  they  are  used  as  they  are 
in  Isa.,  chaps.  40-66,  to  denote  his  attitude  or  activity 
toward  his  people  or  any  others  who  need  and  desire 
his  assistance.  In  these  passages,  as  one  may  learn 
from  parallel  expressions,  they  have  about  the  force  of 
"helpful"  and  "deUverance."  The  adjective  occurs  in 
Ps.  112:4, 

There  breaketh  forth  in  the  darkness  a  light  for  the 
upright, 

Gracious,  and  merciful,  and  righteous. 

See  also  116:5, 

Gracious  is  Yahweh  and  righteous, 
Yea,  our  God  is  merciful; 

^  Gen.  s :  24;  I  Kings  2:11. 


THE  BOOK  OF  PSALMS  385 

and  145- 1 7» 

Righteous  is  Yahweh  in  all  his  ways, 
And  gracious  in  all  his  acts. 

More  frequent  is  the  noun.    It  is  used  in  appeals  for 
divine  aid.    Thus,  in  4 :  i  a  sufferer  prays, 

Answer  me  when  I  call, 
O  God  of  my  righteousness; 

that  is,  God  of  my  deliverance,  or,  more  freely  rendered, 
God  my  deliverer.'    Here  belong,  also,  88: 12, 

Will  thy  wonders  be  acknowledged  in  the  darkness  ? 
And  thy  righteousness  in  the  land  of  forgetfulness  ? 

118:19, 

Open  to  me  the  gates  of  righteousness; 

Let  me  enter  them,  giving  thanks  to  Yahweh; 

and  69:27,  where  the  psalmist,  speaking  of  the  wicked, 

prays, 

Add  iniquity  to  their  iniquity, 

And  let  them  not  share  in  thy  righteousness. 

The  next  to  the  last  of  the  passages  quoted  suggests 
a  second  group  consisting  of  those  expressing  gratitude 
for  deliverance.     Thus,  7:17, 

I  will  give  thanks  to  Yahweh  for  his  righteousness; 
and  22:31, 

They  shall  come  and  declare  his  righteousness, 

publicly  testify  to  what  he  has  wrought  for  them.^ 

In  the  remaining  passages  in  which  the  saving 
righteousness  of  Yahweh  finds  mention  it  is  simply 

^Seefurther  Pss.  5:8;  31:1;  35:24;  36:10;  71:2;  143:1,11. 
»See  also  Pss.  35:28  (71:24);   40:9,  10;    S^'-^A',    7i:iSf-;   89:16; 
145:7. 


386        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

ascribed  to  him  or  described  in  its  nature  or  operation. 
Thus,  24:5  says  of  the  righteous, 

He  shall  receive  the  blessing  of  Yahweh, 

And  righteousness  from  the  God  of  his  salvation, 

that  is,  deliverance  from  God  his  Savior;  and  in  48:10 
the  poet,  addressing  Yahweh  himself,  says. 

Thy  right  hand  is  full  of  righteousness.' 

The  prominence  of  the  ethical  element  in  the  Psalms 
is  undeniable.  It  is  never  ignored;  for,  although  in 
37 :3i,  103: 18,  and  elsewhere  the  Law  is  highly  extolled, 
no  encouragement  is  given  to  pure  ritualism.  The 
only  passage  in  which  independent  value  seems  to  be 
attributed  to  sacrifices  is  20:3,  where  the  writer  expresses 
the  hope  that  Yahweh  will  remember  all  the  offerings 
and  accept  all  the  burnt  offerings  of  the  pious  prince 
to  whom  the  psalm  is  addressed.  On  the  other  hand, 
there  are  several  passages  in  which  the  opposite  doctrine 
is  strongly  enforced.  The  most  important  is  Ps.  50. 
In  this  interesting  lyric  the  subject  of  sacrifice  is  first 
incidentally  mentioned  in  vs.  5,  where  the  "saints" 
are  described  as 

Those  that  have  made  a  covenant  with  me  in  sacrifice. 

Here,  at  first  sight,  sacrifice  seems  to  have  an  essential 
importance,  but  Yahweh,  in  vss.  7  ff.,  proceeds  to  cor- 
rect any  such  inference.  He  tells  his  people  that  he 
really  has  no  need  of  any  of  the  various  animals  that 
they  slay  at  his  altar;  that  a  sacrifice  of  thanksgiving 
in  recognition  of  the  benefits  he  has  bestowed  upon 

« See  also  Pss.  65:5;  71:19;  85:10,11,13;  89:16;  98:2;  103:6, 
17;  123:9. 


THE  BOOK  OF  PSALMS  387 

them,  without  any  such  symbols,  would  be  much  more 
acceptable.    He  says. 

Sacrifice  to  God  thanksgiving, 

And  pay  to  the  Most  High  thy  vows; 

Then  call  upon  me  in  the  day  of  trouble, 

And  I  will  rescue  thee,  since  thou  hast  honored  me.* 

This  is  entirely  in  harmony  with  the  teaching  of  the 
prophets,  who  insisted  that  their  people  unite  moral 
conduct  with  their  religious  observances.  The  polemic 
against  ritualism  appears  also  in  Pss.  50:23;  40:6-10; 
43:3  f.;  51:16  f.;  69:30  f. 

There  is  another  class  of  passages  in  which  sacrifices 
find  mention,  but  in  which  they  are  clearly  subordinate 
to,  and  symbolical  of,  the  sentiment  by  which  they  are 
accompanied.     One  of  them  is  4: 5, 

Offer  a  sacrifice  of  righteousness, 

a  proper  sacrifice. 

And  put  your  trust  in  Yahweh. 

See  also  27:6.  The  closing  verses  of  Ps.  51,  which  are 
supposed  to  be  later  than  the  rest,  are  to  be  explained 
in  the  same  way.  When  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  are 
rebuilt,  and  the  inhabitants  wish  to  show  their  gratitude, 
Yahweh  will  be  pleased  with  the  appropriate  sacrifices 
offered    at   his   sanctuary.    See    also    54:6,    correctly 

rendered. 

Gladly  will  I  sacrifice  to  thee, 

I  will  confess  that  thy  name  is  good.' 

Finally,  in  141:2  a  suppliant  presents  this  petition. 

Let  my  prayer  be  set  forth  as  incense  before  thee, 
The  uplifting  of  my  hands  as  the  evening  sacrifice. 

'  Ps.  so:i4f.  '  See  further  Pss.  66:13-17;  107:22;  116:17, 


388        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

Here  the  symbol  fades  into  a  simile,  and  the  sentiment 
symbolized  asserts  itself  in  its  essential  importance.' 
These  passages,  and  especially  the  last  two,  show  that  the 
tendency  among  the  psalmists  was  not  toward  ritualism, 
but,  as  a  result  of  the  discipline  of  the  Exile  toward  a  more 
ethical  and  spiritual  interpretation  of  their  rehgion. 

This  tendency  shows  itself,  also,  in  a  term  seldom 
found  outside  the  psalms,  and  only  once^  in  them,  of  the 
Deity,  which  is  often  (24  times)  employed  of  men 
instead  of  the  one  rendered  ** righteous,"  especially 
where  there  is  a  possessive  pronoun.  In  the  latter 
case  it  is  usually  translated  "saint."  It  characterizes 
the  spirit  rather  than  the  practice  of  men  over  against 
the  "kindness"  (from  the  same  root)  of  the  Deity 
toward  them,  like  "devout"  or  "pious."  It  is  therefore 
the  appropriate  word  in  such  passages  as  4:3;  16:10; 
32:6;  86:2.  The  last  is  the  familiar  one  in  which 
occurs  the  expression  rendered  in  the  Authorized 
Version,  "I  am  holy,"  and  in  the  Revised,  "I  am  godly." 
It  evidently  means  "I  am  devoted"  (to  thee),  as  appears 
from  the  following  line,  where  the  poet  calls  himself 
"thy  servant  that  trusteth  in  thee."  Cases  in  which 
it  has  more  nearly  the  sense  of  "righteous"  are  37:28 
and  97 :  10,  where  it  is  used  in  alternation  with  that  word, 
and  12:1  and  31:23,  where  it  is  in  parallelism  with 
"faithful."^  Finally,  it  is  used  of  the  true  Israel,^ 
those  who  have  covenanted  with  God  in  sacrifice,s  as 
distinguished  from  those  who  disregard  his  precepts.^ 

'  See  also  Ps.  119: 108.  '  See  also  Ps.  18: 25. 

»Ps.  145:17.  *Ps.  148:14.  5Ps.  50:2. 

•Ps.  43:1;  and  see  further,  30:4;  S2:8f.;  79:2;  85:7!.;  89:19; 
116:15;  132:9;  145:10;  149:1,5,9. 


THE  BOOK  OF  PSALMS  389 

The  discussion  has  thus  far  shown  that  Yahweh  is  a 
righteous  God,  and  that  he  rewards  men  who  are 
righteous,  upright,  perfect  (after  their  measure),  other- 
wise known  as  his  saints,  and  punishes  the  wicked 
according  to  their  deserts;  but  no  attempt  has  been 
made  to  define  or  discover  the  precise  character  of  the 
persons  included  under  these  contrary  categories.  It 
is  now  necessary  to  attempt  such  a  definition;  in  other 
words,  to  inquire  how  far  life  was  moralized  by  the 
authors  represented  in  the  Book  of  Psalms.  The 
method  hitherto  pursued  would  require  a  detailed  and 
systematic  arrangement  of  the  data  collected,  but  in 
this  instance  it  will  be  interesting  first  to  consider 
briefly  some  psalms  in  which  something  like  an  ethical 
program  seems  to  have  been  attempted.  One  of  them 
(146)  describes  the  moral  perfections  of  the  Creator. 
He 

Who  made  heaven  and  earth, 

The  sea,  and  all  that  in  them  is, 


IS  one 


Who  keepeth  truth  for  ever; 
Who  executeth  justice  for  the  oppressed; 
Who  giveth  bread  to  the  hungry. 
Yahweh  looseth  the  prisoners; 
Yahweh  openeth  the  eyes  of  the  blind; 
Yahweh  raiseth  them  that  are  bowed  down; 
Yahweh  loveth  the  righteous; 
Yahweh  watcheth  over  the  sojourners; 
The  orphan  and  the  widow  he  relieveth; 
But  the  way  of  the  wicked  he  tumeth  upside 
down.^ 


^Ps.  146:6  ff. 


390       THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

There  are  several  in  which  the  ideal  human  character 
is  more  or  less  fully  portrayed.  The  oldest  is  Ps.  24, 
where  to  the  question, 

Who  shall  ascend  into  the  hill  of  Yahweh  ? 
And  who  shall  stand  in  his  holy  place  ? 

the  author  makes  reply : 

He  that  hath  clean  hands  and  a  pure  heart; 
Who  hath  not  uplifted  his  soul  to  falsehood, 
And  hath  not  sworn  deceitfully. 
He  shall  receive  a  blessing  from  Yahwah, 
And  deliverance  from  God  his  Savior^ 

The  second  is  similar  in  form,  but  goes  more  into  the 
details  of  conduct.     The  question  now  is, 

Yahweh,  who  shall  sojourn  in  thy  tabernacle  ? 
Who  shall  dwell  in  thy  holy  place  ? 

and  the  answer: 

He  that  walketh  uprightly  and  doeth  righteousness, 

And  speaketh  truth  in  his  heart; 

He  slandereth  not  with  his  tongue, 

Doeth  no  evil  to  his  neighbor. 

Neither  putteth  he  reproach  upon  his  neighbor; 

In  his  eyes  a  reprobate  is  despised, 

But  he  honoreth  them  that  fear  Yahweh; 

He  sweareth  to  his  own  hurt  and  change th  not; 

He  putteth  not  out  his  money  on  discount. 

Neither  taketh  he  a  bribe  against  the  innocent: 

He  that  doeth  these  things  shall  never  be  moved.' 

The  psalm  that  remains  to  be  quoted  in  this  connection 
is  less  didactic  and  more  devotional.  It  is  the  twenty- 
sixth,  in  which  the  writer,  like  Job  in  chap.  31,  challenges 
investigation  into  his  character.     He  says: 

»Ps.  24:3-5.  «Ps.  isrifif. 


THE  BOOK  OF  PSALMS  391 

Search  me,  Yahweh,  and  prove  me; 
Try  my  reins  and  my  heart. 
For  thy  kindness  is  before  my  eyes, 
And  I  have  walked  faithfully  with  thee. 
I  have  not  sat  with  worthless  people: 
Nor  do  I  go  among  dissemblers. 
I  hate  the  assembly  of  evil-doers. 
And  I  do  not  sit  with  the  wicked. 
I  wash  my  hands  in  innocency, 
And  compass,  Yahweh,  thy  altar; 
Sounding  the  voice  of  praise, 
And  telling  all  thy  wonders. 
Yahweh,  I  love  the  site  of  thy  house. 
And  the  place  where  thy  glory  dwelleth. 
Gather  not  my  soul  with  sinners, 
And  my  life  with  men  of  blood; 
In  whose  hands  is  wickedness. 
And  whose  right  hands  are  full  of  bribes; 
But  let  me  walk  in  my  integrity; 
Redeem  me  and  have  mercy  on  me.' 

There  are  two  or  three  things  to  be  said  concerning 
these  passages.  In  the  first  place,  it  is  clear  that 
neither  of  the  last  three  was  intended  to  be  a  complete 
guide  to  a  right  life.  In  the  first^  there  is  really  but 
one  specification,  and  in  the  other  two,  between  which 
there  is  a  pretty  close  correspondence,  only  a  part  of  the 
ethical  field  is  covered.  It  should  be  noted,  however, 
that  in  all  of  them  the  writer  goes  to  the  root  of  morahty. 
Thus,  24:4  requires  that  the  man  who  approaches 
Yahweh  have,  not  only  "clean  hands,''  but  a  "pure 
heart,"  while  in  15:2  the  righteous  man  must  speak 
"truth  in  his  heart,"  and  in  26:2  the  psalmist  invites 
Yahweh  to  begin  the  proposed  inquisition  with  his 
inmost  parts.    A  third  point  is  that,  whereas  in  Ps.  24 

»Ps.  26:2ff.  »Ps.  24. 


392        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

the  righteous  man  retains  his  individuahty,  in  Ps.  15  he 
identifies  himself,  over  against  the  reprobate,  with  those 
who  fear  Yahweh,  and  in  Ps.  26  the  opposing  element  has 
become  an  "assembly,"  that  is,  a  party  of  falsifiers,  evil- 
doers, sinners,  and  even  men  of  blood.  These  are  the 
"enemies"  and  "adversaries"  of  whom  many  psalms  com- 
plain that  they  "hate,"  and  "oppress,"  and  "persecute" 
the  righteous,  even  God's  "  saints."'  In  other  words,  the 
psalm  is  one  of  many  in  which  the  Jews  after  the  Exile 
gave  vent  to  their  sorrow  and  resentment  under  the 
pressure  of  foreign  domination  or  partisan  persecution. 
The  foregoing  survey  has  prepared  the  way  for  a 
more  detailed  examination  of  the  ethical  content  of 
the  Psalms.  At  the  outset  one  is  met  with  a  confirma- 
tion of  the  statement  already  made  with  reference  to  the 
spiritual  trend  of  their  teaching,  in  that  one  of  the  most 
conspicuous  of  the  virtues  they  recommend  is  meekness 
or  humiHty.  Indeed,  so  admirable  was  this  quahty  in  the 
eyes  of  the  godly  men  by  whom  the  Psalms  were  written, 
that  in  45 : 4  it  forms  a  trinity  with  faithfulness  (truth)  and 
righteousness,*  and  several  times  the  term  "meek"  is 
used  like  "righteous,"  "upright,"  etc.,  of  the  godly  in 
distinction  from  the  wicked,  who  are  also  called  "the 
proud."     Good  illustrations  of  this  usage  are  37 :  10  f . : 

Yet  a  little  while,  and  the  wicked  shall  not  be; 

Yea,  thou  shalt  examine  the  place  where  he  was,  and  he 

will  be  gone; 
But  the  meek  shall  inherit  the  land, 
And  delight  themselves  in  abundant  prosperity; 

^Pss.  i7:8f.;   25:19;  38:19;  71:11. 

'The  Hebrew  text  is  doubtful;  but  this  is  the  interpretation  of 
the  English  translators,  and  it  has  the  support  of  the  great  ancient 
versions. 


THE  BOOK  OF  PSALMS  393 

36:11, 

Let  not  the  proud  foot  reach  me; 

Or  the  hand  of  the  wicked  drive  me  away; 

and  18: 27  in  its  original  form, 

A  himible  people  thou  wilt  save, 
But  haughty  eyes  thou  wilt  abase.^ 

The  importance  given  to  humility  as  a  virtue,  and 
pride  as  a  defect,  in  the  Psalms  is  noteworthy;  not  less 
so  the  almost  entire  absence  of  references  to  personal 
habits  elsewhere  condemned.  For  example,  there  seems 
to  be  but  one  passage,  69: 12,  and  that  not  directly  con- 
demnatory, on  the  abuse  of  intoxicating  drinks,  and 
this  is  somewhat  weakened  by  104: 15,  where  wine  is  an 
acknowledged  blessing. 

There  is  equal  reticence  on  the  part  of  the  psalmists 
with  reference  to  the  requirements  of  domestic  ethics. 
In  50: 18  the  wicked  are  accused  of  being  partakers  with 
adulterers,  but  on  the  subject  of  the  relation  between 
parents  and  children,  etc.,  there  is  only  the  indirect 
light  that  comes  from  such  passages  as  27:10;  103:13; 
127:3;   128:3;  69:8;   123:2. 

In  the  field  of  social  ethics  there  is  more  material; 
yet  not  as  much  as  might  have  been  expected;  for, 
although  the  Psalms  abound  in  praise  for  those  who 
observe,  and  blame  for  those  who  neglect,  their  duties 

*  On  the  meek,  see  further  Pss.  10:17;  22:26;  25:9;  34:2;  69:32; 
72:9;  147:6;  149:4;  on  the  proud,  5:5;  10:2;  17:10;  31:18,  23; 
59:12;  73:3,  6,  8;  75:4;  86:14;  94:2,  4;  101:5;  119:5,  69;  123:4; 
138:6;  140:5.  There  are  a  number  of  passages  in  which,  although  the 
present  reading  is  "the  nations,"  there  is  ground  for  suspecting  that 
the  original  text  had  "the  proud."  See  9:5,  15,  17,  19,  20,  where  Duhm 
substitutes  the  latter  for  the  former;  also  10:16;   59:5,  8. 


394        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

to  their  fellows,  there  is  rather  a  dearth  of  particulars. 
Here,  as  in  most  of  the  other  books  of  the  Old  Testament, 
justice  is  highly  commended  and  injustice  as  strongly- 
condemned.  In  106:3  a  blessing  is  promised  them  that 
"observe  justice"  and  "do  righteousness  at  all  times," 
and  the  author  of  119:21  claims  the  divine  blessing 
because  he  has  "done  justice  and  righteousness." 
This  virtue  is  required  especially  of  kings  and  all  others 
in  power  and  authority.  The  ruler  of  Ps.  45  is  credited 
with  it,  and  assured  that,  because  he  has  it,  his  "throne 
will  be  for  ever  and  ever."'  ' 

Over  against  the  just  stands  the  numerous  class  of 
"men  of  violence."  The  term  "violence,"  to  judge 
from  140:1  ff.,  covers  any  form  of  personal  attack,  but 
in  54 : 3  the  violent  man  is  one  who  has  sought  after  the 
soul  of  the  writer,  that  is,  made  an  attempt  upon  his 
life.  Nor  is  this  the  only  case  of  the  kind.  There  are 
numerous  passages  showing  that,  during  the  period 
most  prolific  of  psalms,  the  "violence  and  strife  in  the 
city"  often  took  this  form.  The  wicked  are  accused 
of  seeking  to  slay  the  righteous  in  7:2;  27:2;  31:13; 
35:4;  37*14,  32;  38:12;  40:14;  54:3;  56:1  f.,  6; 
57:3;  62:3;  63:9;  70:2;  71:10;  86:14;  94:6;  109:16; 
119:95;  and  in  10:8;  14:4  (53:4);  94:6  of  having 
accomplished  their  purpose.  Therefore  they  are  called 
"men  of  blood."*  In  44:22  and  79:2  f.,  10  it  is  foreign 
enemies  by  whom  the  saints  are  treated  like  "sheep  for 
the  slaughter"  and  their  flesh  given  to  "the  beasts  of 
the  earth."3 

^  Ps.  45 : 6.     See  also  72 :  i  ff. 

»Pss.  5:6;  26:9;  55:23;  59:2;  139:19- 

3  See  also  Ps.  83:2. 


THE  BOOK  OF  PSALMS  395 

The  "violence"  of  the  Psalms  did  not  always  take 
the  form  of  actual,  perhaps  not  of  intended,  murder. 
There  is  a  series  of  passages  that  indicate  the  preva- 
lence of  oppression,  or  the  subjection  of  one  person, 
or  class  of  persons,  to  the  real  or  fancied  advantage  of 
another.  It  is,  of  course,  the  wicked  who  are  the 
oppressors^  and  the  poor  and  helpless  or  the  righteous 
who  are  their  victims.^  The  psalmist  pleads  for  the 
correction  of  the  wrongs  of  which  he  complains,  and 
declares  his  faith  in  Yahweh  as  a  savior,  or  rejoices  in 
the  results  of  divine  intervention.^ 

In  another  series  of  passages  the  violence  of  the 
wicked  is  of  the  nature  of  persecution,  or  the  persistent 
harassment  of  one  person  or  class  of  persons  by  another. 
The  Hebrew  word  most  frequently  used  to  describe 
this  kind  of  hostility  is  the  one  meaning  "  pursue, "^ 
for  which  10:2  has  one  dalalf  rendered  "hotly  pursue," 
that  is,  chase,  as  one  hunts  game.  In  other  cases  the 
psalmist  represents  himself  as  surrounded  by  his  enemies^ 
and  harassed  as  by  archers,^  bees,^  or  even  savage 
beasts,  bulls  of  Bashan,^  dogs,'"  or  lions."  He  entreats 
Yahweh  to  deliver  him  and  punish  his  persecutors, 
because  he  has  done  nothing  to  warrant  their  hostility." 

The  Psalms  condemn  violence,  not  only  when  it  is 
directed  against  the  person,  but  also  when  the  property 

^Pss.  10:7;   17:9;  73:8;  89:22;  94:5. 
^Pss.  10:18;   12:5;  72:4,14;  74:21. 

3PSS.  9:13;     25:16;    31:7;    42:9;    43:2;     62:10;     103:6;     119:121  f. 

*  Radhaph:  Pss.  69:26;  119:86,  157,  161;  142:6;   143:3. 
5dalak  9  Ps.  22:12. 

^  Ps.  109 : 3.  w  Ps.  22 :  16,  20. 

'Ps.ii:2.  "  Pss.  22:21;  35:17. 

8Ps.  118:12.  "Pss.35:7f.;  109:35.;  etc. 


396        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

of  another  is  affected,  as  in  theft'  and  robbery.^  Some- 
times, it  appears,  the  wicked,  shrinking  from  such 
rough  methods,  accompHshed  their  purpose  by  borrow- 
ing and  not  returning  the  thing  or  things  that  they 
cove  ted. 3 

It  is  not  strange  that  violence  should  have  been 
common  in  the  period  during  which  most  of  the  psalms 
were  written,  or  that  it  should  have  been  condemned 
by  the  authors  of  these  compositions.  With  falsehood 
the  case  is  somewhat  different.  It,  too,  was  a  natural 
product  of  the  period,  but  it  had  not  always,  and  in 
all  its  forms,  found  disapproval  among  the  Hebrews. 
There  is  no  prominence  given  to  it  by  the  prophets  in 
the  list  of  offenses  against  which  they  inveigh.  In  the 
Psalms,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  the  offense  of  which 
there  is  most  frequent  complaint  and  most  severe 
criticism.  Before  citing,  however,  the  numerous  pas- 
sages in  which  the  psalmists  give  vent  to  their  dis- 
approval of  falsehood,  it  will  be  best  to  note  their 
attitude  toward  its  opposite,  truth,  which,  as  has  been 
shown,  means  trustworthiness  in  the  broadest  sense. 
It  is  one  of  the  attributes  of  Yahweh,  and  indeed  one 
to  which  almost  as  much  importance  is  assigned  as  to 
his  kindness  or  his  righteousness.  Thus,  in  31:5  he  is 
called  a  ^'God  of  truth,"  which  means  that  he  is  not 
only  the  true  but  the  faithful  God.  His  faithfulness 
is  the  reliance  of  his  people,"*  and  that  "to  all  genera- 
tions. "^  It  is  coupled  with  his  justice,  righteousness, 
or  uprightness  in  96:13;   iiityf.;   119:75,138;   143:1; 

«Ps.  50:18.  3  Ps.  37:21. 

"  Pss.  10:3;  35:10.  <Ps.  91:4. 

sPss.  91:4;  119:90;  146:6;  also  30:9;  69:13;  71:22;  89:8;  132:11. 


THE  BOOK  OF  PSALMS  397 

but  more  frequently  with  his  kindness,  as  in  25:10; 
40:10 f.;  57:10;  86:15;  89:1  f.,  24,  33,  50;  92:2; 
98:3;  100:5;  115-iJ  117:2.  In  36:5  f.  occurs  the 
fourfold  ascription, 

Thy  kindness,  O  Yahweh,  reacheth  to  the  clouds. 
Thy  faithfulness  to  the  sky; 
Thy  righteousness  is  like  the  mountains  of  God, 
Thy  judgments  are  a  great  deep; 

and  in  89 :  14, 

Righteousness  and  justice  are  the  foundation  of  thy 

throne, 
Kindness  and  faithfulness  go  before  thee. 

The  Law  of  God,  because  it  comes  from  him,  is  also 
trustworthy.^ 

Yahweh,  being  what  he  is,  requires  that  man  be 
true  in  his  heart  and  life.^  The  religious  life,  therefore, 
is  put  into  terms  of  faithfulness.    So  in  37 : 3  f . : 

Trust  in  Yahweh  and  do  good; 

Dwell  in  the  land  and  cherish  faithfulness; 

Yea,  take  thy  delight  in  Yahweh, 

And  he  will  give  thee  thy  heart's  desires. 

The  same  thought  is  more  subtly  expressed  in  85: 10  f., 
which  may  be  rendered : 

Kindness  and  faithfulness  shall  meet  each  other, 
Righteousness  and  prosperity  kiss  each  other. 
Faithfulness  shall  spring  from  the  earth, 
And  righteousness  look  down  from  heaven. 

Here  the  "kindness"  is  that  of  Yahweh,  and  the  "right- 
eousness" his  gracious  assistance,  while  the  "faithful- 
ness" is  that  of  man,  and  the  "prosperity"  the  reward 

»Pss.  25:5;  26:3;  43:3;   119:30,  86,  142,  151,  160. 
^  Pss.  32:2;  51:6. 


398        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

of  his  loyalty.  The  righteous  man,  according  to  15 : 2-4, 
it  will  be  remembered,  is  one 

That  speaketh  truth  in  his  heart; 

That  slandereth  not  with  his  tongue; 

That  sweareth  to  his  own  hurt  and  changeth  not. 

There  were  evidently  many,  when  this  and  other 
psalms  were  composed,  who  fell  far  below  the  standard 
of  trustworthiness  here  presented.  The  author  of  Ps.  52 
thus  arraigns  one  of  his  contemporaries : 

Thy  tongue  deviseth  destruction, 
Like  a  sharpened  razor,  deceiver. 
Thou  lovest  evil  more  than  good, 
Falsehood  more  than  righteous  speech. 
Thou  lovest  all  destructive  words, 
Thou  deceitful  tongue.^ 

The  proper  punishment  for  lying  is  prescribed  in 

120:3  ^•* 

What  shall  be  given  to  thee,  and  what  added. 
Thou  deceitful  tongue  ? 
Arrows  of  a  warrior,  sharp  ones, 
With  coals  from  retem!* 

In  the  following  passages  the  form  of  falsehood 
condemned  is  that  of  false  testimony,  or  slander: 
27:12;  50:20;  101:5;  119:69.  More  significant  are 
those  in  which  the  charge  is  that  of  treachery,  since  they 
reflect  the  methods  of  partisan  strife.  Thus,  in  Ps.  5:9 
the  author  says  of  his  enemies : 

There  is  no  trustworthiness  in  their  mouths; 
Inwardly  they  would  destroy. 
Their  hearts  are  open  sepulchers, 
Although  they  talk  smoothly. 

»Ps.  S2:2ff.    See  also  Pss.  10:7;    35:20;    36:3;    50:19;    59:12; 
109:2. 

"  See  also  Pss.  5:6;  31:18;  63:11;  101:7;  109:2. 


THE  BOOK  OF  PSALMS  399 

In  Ps.  55  the  traitor  is  a  former  friend,  with  whom  the 
poet  "took  sweet  counsel"  as  they  "walked  to  the  house 
of  God."'    But 

He  stretched  forth  his  hand  against  his  friends, 

He  violated  his  covenant. 

His  mouth  was  smoother  than  butter. 

But  in  his  heart  there  was  war; 

His  words  were  softer  than  oil, 

But  they  were  drawn  swords.^ 

See  further,  for  examples  of  duplicity:  12:2;  26:4; 
28:3;  41:6;  62:4;  144:8,  11;  perhaps  also  38:12. 
In  25:3;  59:6;  119:158  it  is  apostates  from  Yahweh 
to  whom  the  psalmist  refers. 

At  first  sight  a  good  deal  of  consideration  seems  to  be 
given  to  the  unfortunate  as  a  class  in  the  Psalms,  but 
this  is  not  really  the  case,  the  fact  being  that  the  adjec- 
tives "poor"  (ani),  "needy"  {^ebhyon),  and  "help- 
less" {dal)  generally  denote  the  class  of  persons  who  are 
otherwise  called  "the  righteous,"  etc.  This  is  clear 
from  a  number  of  passages  in  which  the  two  sets  of 
terms  are  used  interchangeably.  Thus,  in  14:5  f. 
"poor"  and  "righteous"  are  practically  synonyms, 
while  in  40 : 1 2  f.  there  are  two  pairs  of  equivalents : 

I  know  that  Yahweh  will  maintain  the  cause  of  the 

poor, 
Justice  for  the  needy. 
Surely  the  righteous  shall  praise  thy  name, 
The  upright  shall  dwell  in  thy  presence. 

Other  similar  passages  are  22 :  24 ;  34 : 6  f . ;  68 : 9  f . ; 
69 :  32  f . ;  72:12;  74 :  19 ;  86 :  i  f .  Still  more  convincing 
are  such  passages  as  37 :  14,  where  the  poor  and  needy 

'Ps.  55:14.  ='Ps.  55:20  f. 


400        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

are  identified  with  the  upright  and  set  over  against  the 
wicked : 

The  wicked  have  drawn  the  sword  and  bent  their 

bow 
To  cast  down  the  poor  and  needy, 
To  slay  the  upright  in  their  way.^ 

Having  learned  from  the  passages  cited  that  the 
stricter  Jews  called  themselves  *'the  poor,"  etc.,  one 
has  no  difficulty  in  finding  numerous  other  examples 
of  the  same  usage;  namely,  in  a  class  in  which  the 
persons  so  designated  appear  in  more  or  less  close 
connection  with  the  wicked^  and  a  few  in  which  there 
is  apparently  no  such  connection. ^ 

It  is  clear  from  the  above  showing  that  the  psalmists 
had  no  lack  of  sympathy  with  misfortune,  but  the 
thoughtful  reader  will  suspect  that  they  expended  it 
largely  on  themselves.  This  suspicion  is  confirmed  by 
the  paucity  of  references  to  any  of  the  classes  of  unfor- 
tunates in  whom  the  prophets  were  interested.  The 
truth  is  that  the  widow,  as  an  object  of  charity,  is 
mentioned  in  the  Psalms  but  three  times,  the  orphan 
six,  and  the  stranger  only  twice,  and  that  in  seven  of 
these  eleven  instances'*  it  is  divine  and  not  human 
charity  that  is  celebrated,  and  the  other  four  are  con- 
tained in  two  complaints  against  recreant  judges^  and 

'This  passage  will  serve  equally  well  as  an  illustration,  even  if, 
as  Duhm  and  others  contend,  the  latter  half  of  the  first  and  the  whole 
of  the  second  line  are  an  addition  to  the  original  text.  See  also  Pss. 
40:155.;  69:28f.;   yoraff.;   107:41  f. 

2  Pss.  9:17  f.;  10:2,9;  12:5;  18:27;  35:10;  72:4,12-14;  109:16 
20-22,  31. 

3  Pss.  74:21;  113:7. 

"Pss.  10:14,  18;  68:5;  146:9.  sps.82:3. 


THE  BOOK  OF  PSALMS  401 

"the  proud'''  in  the  community.  There  are  also  very 
few  passages  in  which  the  poor  as  such  receive  con- 
sideration. Of  these  41:1  is  of  a  general  character. 
The  rest  relate  to  the  relief  of  the  needy,  15:5  forbidding 
discount,  and  37:21,  26  and  112:5  commending  the 
man  who  gladly  lends,  or  better,  gives  of  his  substance 
to  the  impoverished.  To  such  a  man,  says  18:25, 
Yahweh  will  reveal  himself  in  all  his  kindness. 

The  dearth  of  gpr>ninp  f^j^arityin  the  Psalms  is  not 
more  noticeable  than  the  frequency  of  the  manifesta- 
tion of  a  vengeful  spirit.  The  cruelty  of  some  of  these 
passages  makes  the  modern  reader  shudder.  One  of 
them  is  35:4: 

May  they  be  disappointed  and  humiliated 
That  seek  after  my  soul; 
Let  them  be  turned  backward  and  confounded 
That  devise  evil  against  me.^ 


> 


This  is  very  brief  and  simple  compared  with  the  impre- 
cation in  69:22  ff.: 

Let  their  table  before  them  be  a  snare, 

And  their  peace  offerings  a  trap. 

Let  their  eyes  be  darkened  that  they  cannot  see, 

And  smite  their  loins  with  continuous  tottering. 

Pour  out  upon  them  thy  anger, 

And  let  the  fury  of  thy  wrath  overtake  them. 

May  their  camp  be  desolate. 

And  no  one  dwell  in  their  tents. 

Add  iniquity  to  their  iniquity, 

And  let  them  not  share  thy  deliverance. 

Let  them  be  blotted  out  of  the  book  of  life, 

And  not  be  inscribed  among  the  righteous. 

^Ps.  94:6. 

2  See  also  Pss.  35:6;  4o:i4f.;  7o:2f.;  71:13. 


50 


402        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

The  language  here  used  is  cruel  and  vindictive  in  the 
extreme;  yet  this  fact  has  not  prevented  the  theolo- 
gians of  the  past  from  putting  it  into  the  mouth  of  Jesus, 
who,  in  his  life  and  in  his  death,  taught  and  practiced 
the  forgiveness  of  enemies.'  For  other  examples  of 
imprecation  in  the  Psalms,  see  5:10;  68:1  f.;  79:12; 
83:13;  109:6;  140:9  f. 

These  are  but  specimens.  There  are  many  more 
that  fall  far  below  the  Christian  standard  of  moraUty. 
There  is,  however,  another  class  of  passages  that  are 
still  more  objectionable;  namely,  those  in  which  the 
psalmists  give  way  to  an  almost  fiendish  exultation 
over  the  fate  of  their  enemies.  A  good  example  is 
58:10: 

The  righteous  shall  rejoice  when  he  seeth  the  vengeance; 
He  shall  bathe  his  feet  in  the  blood  of  the  wicked; 

from  which  it  is  evident  that,  when  it  was  written,  at 
least  to  the  writer,  the  terms  "righteous"  and  "wicked'' 
had  become  little  more  than  designations  for  hostile 
parties,  without  ethical  significance.  Here  belong 
i37:8f^ 

^^  Daughter  of  Babylon,  destined  to  destruction, 

f       Happy  he  that  rewardeth  thee  as  thou  has  served 

J  us! 

I         Happy  he  that  seizeth  thy  children 

^*N»^    And  dasheth  them  against  a  rock! 

a  passage  that  has  always  been  a  stumbHng-block  to 
the  thoughtful  reader  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures.^  It 
should,  however,  be  borne  in  mind  that  such  passages 
are  all  of  the  nature  of  temporary  ebullitions  of  passion, 

'Luke  23:34. 

'  See  further  Pss.  41 :  10;  59:10;  68:22  f.;  92:11;  149:65. 


THE  BOOK  OF  PSALMS  403 

and  therefore  do  not  represent  the  deliheratft  ji^(;ippTten^ 
or  conviction  of  the  post-exilic  Jews.     Cf .  Job  3i,*r*%~ 

If  I  have  rejoiced  at  the  destruction  of  him  that  hated  me, 
Or  exulted  when  evil  befell  him,  etc.* 

The  last  passage  quoted  from  the  Psalms,  137:8  f., 
is  one  of  many  that  deal  with  foreigners.  It  is  very 
hostile  to  the  Babylonians,  reflecting  the  bitterness  / 
produced  by  the  subjugation  of  Judah  and  the  deporta-  ^^^ 
tion  of  the  better  part  of  its  inhabitants.  The  preceding 
verses  show  how  deeply  the  Jews  resented  the  attitude 
of  the  Edomites  in  that  desperate  crisis.  Pss.  79  and  83 
are  of  a  much  later  date,  having  for  their  background, 
apparently,  an  early  stage  of  the  Maccabean  struggle.^ 
It  was  the  cruelty  of  the  king  of  Syria  and  his  agents 
that  wrung  from  the  Jews  such  appeals  as  Ps.  79: 12, 

Render  to  our  neighbors  sevenfold  in  their  bosoms 
The  reproach  wherewith  they  have  reproached  thee,  O 
Yahweh! 

and  83:13-15: 

O  my  God,  make  them  like  the  whirling  weed, 

Like  stubble  before  the  wind. 

Like  the  fire  that  bumeth  the  forest. 

And  the  flame  that  setteth  the  moimtains  ablaze, 

So  pursue  thou  them  in  thy  tempest, 

And  terrify  them  with  thy  storm-wind.' 

In  none  of  the  psalms  thus  far  cited  is  there  any 
indication  of  interest  in  the  future  of  the  Gentiles; 
for  in  83:165.,  although  they  learn,  they  are  destined     , 

'  See  also  Prov.  20:22;  24:29;  25:21  f. 
» I  Mace.  1:20 ff.;  5:1  ff.;  7:17. 

3  See  further  Pss.  89:50 f.;  118:10;  149:75.  On  9:5,  15,  17,  19, 
20;  10:16;  59:5,  8,  see  p.  393,  n. 


404        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

to  perish  in  learning,  that  Yahweh  is  "the  Most  High 
over  all  the  earth."  There  are,  however,  other  psalms 
which  teach  that  his  gracious  purpose  includes  all 
nations.  In  the  first  place,  they  declare  that  he  alone 
created  all  the  sons  of  men,''  and  his  rule  extends  over 
the  whole  earth.^  His  eyes  keep  watch  upon  them,^ 
and  he  holds  them  responsible  for  their  actions,  whether 
they  are  good  or  evil."* 

Secondly,  there  is  a  series  of  passages  which  teach 
that  Yahweh  is  not  indifferent  to  the  attitude  of  the 
nations  toward  him.  This  is  clear  from  his  efforts  to 
make  them  acquainted  with  his  works  and  ways.  In 
7:8  the  Psalmist  asks  that  they  may  be  witnesses  to 
his  vindication.  Elsewhere  they  are  represented  as 
witnesses  of  the  divine  glory^  or  recipients  of  the  testi- 
mony of  others  with  reference  to  it.** 

The  end  sought  in  thus  displaying  or  celebrating 
the  works  of  Yahweh  here,  as  in  the  other  books  of  the 
Old  Testament,  is  to  secure  the  attention  of  the  peoples 
and  their  recognition  of  him  as  the  only  God.*^  In 
96:7  ff.  they  are  directly  exhorted  to  "ascribe  to 
Yahweh  glory  and  strength,"  "bring  an  offering,"  and 
"worship  him  in  holy  array"  at  his  sanctuary.*  The 
psalmists  repeatedly  voice  the  expectation  that  this 
end  will  be  attained.  Thus,  in  22:27  one  says  that 
All  the  ends  of  the  earth  shall  remember  and  return  to  Yahweh, 
And  all  the  kindreds  of  the  nations  shall  worship  before  him; 

»Ps.  33:15.  aPs.  66:7. 

»Pss.  47:8;  66:7;  99:1;  103:19.  4  Ps.  96:10,  13;  98:9. 

sPss.  77:14;  97:6;  98:2. 

«Pss.  9:11;  49:1;  57:9;  96:3,10;  105:1;  108:3. 

7Pss.  66:3f.;  67:25. 

*  See  also  Pss.  66:8;  68:32,  34;  117:1. 


THE  BOOK  OF  PSALMS  405 

and  in  68:31,  the  meaning  of  which  is  clear,  although 
the  text  is  doubtful,  that 

They  shall  come  in  haste  from  Egypt, 
Ethiopia  shall  eagerly  bring  gifts  to  God.^ 

It  remains  to  consider  the  relation  between  the 
Jews  and  the  Gentiles  when  the  latter  finally  recognize 
Yahweh  as  the  one  God.     In  47:9  the  original  reads, 

literally, 

The  princes  of  the  peoples  are  gathered, 
The  people  of  the  God  of  Abraham. 

The  Authorized  Version  changes  "peoples"  to  "people" 
in  the  first  line  and  renders  the  second. 

Even  the  people  of  the  God  of  Abraham. 

The  Revisers  have  restored  the  plural  "peoples,"  and 
given  to  the  whole  a  new  interpretation  by  substituting 
"/o  6e"  for  "ezj^w."  If,  however,  Hberties  are  to  be 
taken  with  the  passage,  it  is  better,  with  Olshausen,  to 
supply  "with,"  the  Hebrew  equivalent  of  which  has 
the  same  consonants  as  that  of  "people,"  and  may 
easily  have  been  overlooked  by  a  copyist.  Duhm 
adopts  this  emendation  and  remarks  that  "here  the 
heathen  nobles  appear  as  in  some  respects  the  equals 
of  the  people  of  Jahweh."  The  saving  phrase,  "in  some 
respects,"  was  wisely  chosen,  for  it  is  clear  from  vs.  3 
of  the  same  psalm,  which  Duhm  emends  so  as  to  make 

it  read,  not 

He  subdueth  peoples  imder  us, 
And  nations  under  our  feet; 

but. 

He  subdueth  peoples  under  him, 
And  nations  under  his  feet; 

'  See  further  Pss.  68:29;  82:8;  86:9;  102:15,22;  138:4!. 


4o6        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 

that  the  author  was  not  a  universalist  to  the  extent  of 
admitting  the  Gentiles  to  complete  equality  with  the 
children  of  Abraham.  If  it  be  objected,  as  it  is  by 
Duhm,  that  this  interpretation  is  inconsistent  with 
itself,  it  is  only  necessary  to  reply  that  in  all  the  passages 
bearing  on  the  point  in  question  the  psalmists  agree 
with  vs.  3  in  teaching  more  or  less  clearly  the  primacy 
of  their  own  people  in  the  sight  of  Yahweh.  Thus, 
in  2:8  Yahweh  says  to  the  messianic  king, 

Ask  of  me,  and  I  will  give  thee  the  nations  for  thy  inheritance, 
And  the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth  for  thy  possession; 

and  in  72:9  the  author  prophesies  with  reference  to  the 
same  august  person  that 

All  kings  shall  fall  down  before  him. 
All  rulers  shall  serve  him.* 

»  See  also  Pss.  18:43  jff.;  6o:6£f.;  110:6. 


i 


INDEXES 


INDEXES 


I.    TOPICS  TREATED 


Abigail,  wife  of  David,  65  f.,  72  f. 

Abimelech,  son  of  Gideon,  120  f., 
123,  147. 

Abimelech  of  Gerar,  14,  27,33,42. 

Abner,  65  f.,  73. 

Abraham,  story  of:  in  J,  16,  26  f., 
30,  32,  34,  41  f.;  in  E,  103;  in 
supplementary  passages,  151  f.; 
in  P,  259. 

Absalom,  64,  68  f.,  72  f.,  76,  78  f., 
186. 

Achan,  60  f . 

Adultery:  practice  of,  130,  201  f., 
222,  225,  287,  308,  331  f.;  con- 
demnation of,  33,  57,  68,  164, 
177,  215,  219,  261,  263  f.,  308, 
331  f.;  figurative  sense,  126  ff., 
202,  218. 

Adversary,  292  f.,  352,  357. 

Ahab,  83  ff.,  88,  90  ff.,  157. 

Ahimaaz,  69. 

Amos,  the  prophet:  date,  94; 
events  of  his  time,  93  f.;  ethical 
ideas,  12,  94  ff.,  126,  136,  141  f., 
145,  149,  192,  252. 

Amos,  the  book,  6. 

Animals,  regard  for,  172,  186,  344. 

Bathsheba,  67  f.,  71. 

Bildad,  the  Shuhite,  296  f.,  303, 

306. 
Bloodshed,  a  comprehensive  term, 

224ff.,394f. 
Book  of  the  Covenant.    See  Codes 

of  the  Pentateuch. 


Bribery,  98,  118,  139,  144  f.,  156, 
170,  225  f.,  280,  334,  390  f. 

Cain,  the  first  murderer,  29;  story 
of,  25,  148,  ISO. 

Caleb,  SI  f.,  S5,  187,  230. 

Chronicles  (Ezra  and  Nehemiah): 
date,  349;  object  and  method, 
349  f.;  extravagance,  3Sof.; 
omissions,  3S1  f-,  3S6f.;  liber- 
ties taken,  3S2;  value,  353; 
ethical  standpoint,  3S3ff-;  de- 
tailed teaching,  3s8  ff. 

Codes  of  the  Pentateuch:  dates, 
44  f . ;  Ephraimite,  1 10  ff.,  163  ff., 
170,  264  ff.;  Deuteronomic, 
162  ff.,  260,  26s,  286,  290,  337; 
Priests',  260  ff. 

Compassion  in  God,  48, 129  f.,  389. 

Concubinage:  a  recognized  cus- 
tom, 37  f.,  s8f.,  66  f.,  114, 
i6s  f.,  2S9  f.,  348;    restrictions, 

114,  i6s. 
Conscience,  13,  320. 
Conspiracy,  118. 
Continence  and  incontinence,  33* 

260,  328. 
Courage,    34,     S4ff.,  64f.,    79  f.i 

82  f.,  84,  120  f.,  144,  196  f.,  308 

Covenant  between  Yahweh  and 
his  people:  an  ethical  bond,  15; 
origin  and  renewal,  2,  46  f.,  2>2>, 
161  f.,  176,  2S7  f.;  a  figurative 
marriage,    126  ff.,  203,  218;     a 


409 


4IO        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 


spiritual  renewal,  200,  208;  the 
promise  to  David,  210  f.;  to  the 
Levites,  210  f.,  287. 

Criminals,  treatment  of,  168  f. 

Criticism,  biblical:  effect  on  bibli- 
cal problems,  i;  findings  on 
Pentateuch,  i  f.,  45;  on  "the 
Former  Prophets,"  3  f. 

Cunning,  admiration  of,  23  f.,  35, 
50  f.,  209. 

Cyrus,  agent  of  Yahweh,  238, 
243  f. 

Daniel:  in  tradition,  152;  in  the 
Book  of  Daniel,  269  ff. 

Daniel,  the  book:  date,  10; 
unity,  369;  ethical  teaching, 
3695.;  purpose,  371  f. 

David:  in  J,  60,  63  £f.,  89;  in  E, 
121  ff.;  in  redactional  passages, 
153,  157,  159  f-,  186  ff.;  in 
Kings,  215;  in  Chronicles, 
351  f.,  356  ff.    See  also  230,  240. 

Day  of  Yahweh,  99,  189,  233, 
247  f.,  277ff.,  314,  38of. 

Deborah,  55,  58. 

Debt,  release  from,  171,  220,  265, 

359- 

Decalogues:  first,  45  f.;  second, 
109  f.;  third,  174  ff.;  Ezekiel's, 
219  f. 

Deuteronomy :  component  of  Pen- 
tateuch, 2,  13;  origin,  161  f.; 
code,  162  ff.;  redactional  addi- 
tions, 178  ff. 

Deuteronomic  elements:  in  Exo- 
dus and  Numbers,  186  f.;  in 
Joshua-Samuel  (incl.  Kings, 
chaps,  if.),  187  f.;  in  Kings, 
213  ff. 

Dinah,  33  f.,  37, 105. 


Discount,  170  f.,  186,  219,  22  ff., 

265,  342,  401. 
Divorce:     regulation,    163,    222; 

prohibition,  286. 
Duty  in  general,  12  f.,  17,  268  f. 

Ecclesiastes,  the  book:  date,  9, 
362;   integrity,  362;   additions, 

362  f.;    ethics  of  the  original, 

363  ff. 
Ehud,  55  f. 

Election,  doctrine  of,  12  f.,  26, 
46  f.,  100  f.,  126, 130, 137, 158  f., 
180  f.,  184  f.,  203  f.,  220,  243, 
256,  274  f.,  289,  314  f.,  359  f., 
370,  405  f. 

Elihu,  the  Buzite,  309,  392. 

Elijah,  the  prophet,  82  ff.,  87  f., 

91  f-,  131- 
Eliphaz,    the    Temanite,    294  ff., 

302,  305. 
Elisha,  the  prophet,  84  ff.,  92,  131. 
Ephraimite    Narrative :     original 

story,  2f.,  102  ff.,  257,  259  f., 

262,    264  f.;     later    additions, 

153  ff. 
Esther,  character  of,  373  f. 
Esther,    the    book:     date,    8f.; 

ethical  value,  372  f. 
Eunuchs,  275  f. 
Ezekiel,  the  prophet:    date  and 

fortunes,  218;  decalogue,  219  f.; 

detailed  teachings,  22  ff,  168. 
Ezekiel,  the  book,  5. 
Ezra,  the  scribe,  267  f.,  360. 
Ezra,  the  book.    See  Chronicles. 
Exodus,  moral  effect  of,  47. 
Faithfulness:  in  Yahweh,  47,  126, 

203,  396  f.;  in  man,  126,  130  f., 

203,  209  ff.,  255,  338  ff.,  397  ff. 
Falsehood:    resource  of  cunning, 


INDEXES 


411 


24,  35,  50  f.,  57,  59,  69  f.,  86  f., 
108;  weakness  of  women,  104, 
108;  condemnation  of,  87, 103  f., 
108,  122,  208  f.,  228  f.,  254, 
259,  266,  281,  339  f.,  390  f.,  398. 

Fasting,  251  f.,  272  f.,  313  f. 

Flattery,  340. 

Foreigners:  alliances  with,  41  f., 
79,  92  f.,  267  f.,  291;  incorpora- 
tion of,  51  f.,  78  ff.,  230;  pro- 
tection of,  119,  267;  instruments 
of  Yahweh,  100  f.,  141  f.,  212, 
245  f . ;  objects  of  Yahweh's  con- 
cern, 100,  242  f.,  249  f.,  255  f., 
267,  274,  282  f.,  288  f.,  290  f., 
314  f.,  405  f.;  restrictions  on, 
119,  267;  hostility  to,  41,  61  f., 
124,  173  f.,  183  f.,  187,  191  f., 
217,  230  £f.,  24s  S.,  278  f.,  281  f., 

284,314,3595. 
Fornication:  toleration,  33  f.,  57; 
prevalence,  97;    growing  oppo- 
sition, 67  f.,  97,  IIS,  164,  328  f., 

331  f. 
Future  life:  rare  references,  16  f.; 
intimations,  303  f.,  370 f.,  381  f. 

Gentleness,  240. 

Gideon:  in  J,  56,  59;  in  E,  120. 

Good,  the  highest,  16  f.,  34,  158, 

181  f.,  20s,  274  f.,  293,  304,  310, 

322  ff.,  366  ff.,  379  ff. 
Good-will,  law  of,  13  f. 
Greed,  139,  156,  308,  336. 

Habakkuk,  the  prophet,  191. 
Habakkuk,  the  book,  7,  191. 
Hagar:  in  J,  36,  38;  in  P,  259. 
Haggai,    the    prophet:     purpose, 

249;  teaching,  249  f.,  252. 
Haggai,  the  book,  7. 


Hammurabi,  Code  of,  38  f.,  43, 
iiiff.,  116,  163,  168,  170,  261. 

Hannah,  mother  of  Samuel,  155. 

Hireling,  treatment  of,  170,  207, 
287. 

Honesty:  in  business,  97,  131, 
169,  226  f.,  259,  337;  in  service, 
155  f-,  209  f.,  287. 

Hosea,  the  prophet:  date,  125; 
events  of  his  time,  125  f.; 
character,  126;  personal  experi- 
ence, 126  ff.;  ethical  teaching, 
129  f.,  156,  203,  218. 

Hospitahty,  41,  59,  85,  308. 

Humility,  64  ff.,  154,  240,  310, 
325  f.,  392  f. 

Hushai,  friend  of  David,  69. 

Hypocrisy,  288,  340. 

Ideals  of  the  Hebrews:  a  numer- 
ous posterity,  16,  36,  158;  a 
united  people,  54;  a  world-wide 
influence,  240  ff.,  249  f.,  255  f., 
274,  282  f.,  288  f.,  405. 

Immodesty,  163. 

Incest:  early  instances,  33  f.,  36; 
later  restrictions,  163,  225, 
262  f. 

Intemperance  in  general,  364. 

Interest,  220,  226  ff.,  265,  342. 

Isaac,  story  of:  in  J,  27,  30,  33, 
35  ff.;  inE,  103  f.;  in  P,  259. 

Isaiah,  the  prophet:  date,  133; 
events  of  his  time,  133  ff.;  atti- 
tude and  policy,  136  f.;  ethical 
teaching,  137  ff.,  252. 

Isaiah,  the  book;  composition,  4; 
exilian  additions,  236  ff.;  post- 
exilian  accretions,  rf&lk. 

Israel,  Kingdom  of:  origin,  81; 
cause  of  schism,  89  f.;    in  the 


412        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 


Books  of  Kings,  213  f.;  ignored 
by  Chronicler,  354  ff. 

Jacob,  story  of;  in  J,  27  ff.,  30, 
32f.,  3sff.,4off.;  in  E,  104;  in 
P,  259  f.    See  also  131. 

Jael,  55,  120. 

Jephthah,  103,  121  f.,  159. 

Jeremiah,  the  prophet:  date,  194; 
isolation,  194  ff.;  an  individual- 
ist, 199  f.;  ethical  ideas,  168, 
171,    176,   200  ff.,    218  f.,    252, 

353  f.,  358- 
Jeremiah,  the  book:    date,  4f.; 

composition,  5. 
Jeroboam  I,  81,  90,  213  f. 
Jezebel,  83,  85,  88,  90  ff. 
Joab,  65,  73f.,  77f.,  115,  188. 
Job:  in  tradition,  152;  in  the  Book 

of  Job,  292  ff .    See  also  366,  368. 
Job,  the  book;   structure,  8,  292; 

date,   8f.;    framework,    292  f.; 

poem,  293  ff.;  additions,  310  ff. 

See  also  353. 
Joel,  the  prophet,  313  f. 
Joel,  the  book:   date,  6;   general 

character,  313. 
Jonah,  the  book:    character,   6; 

content,  314  f.;  purpose,  315. 
Jonathan,  friend  of  David,  60,  64, 

70  f.,  123,  159  f. 
Joseph,  story  of:  in  J,  28  f.,  31,  33, 

39  f.;  inE,  105^,354. 
Joshua,  son  of  Nun:  in  J,  54  f.;  in 

E,  120. 
Joshua,   the  book:    composition, 

3,  119;   the  Deuteronomic  ele- 
ment, 187  f. 
Jubilee,  year  of;  265  f . 
Judah,  son  of  Jacob,  33  f.,  39  f., 

105,  230. 


Judean  Narrative:  the  original 
story,  2f.,  19  ff.,  44  ff.,  53  ff., 
63  ff.,  259;  compared  with  E, 
102  ff.,  106  ff.,  119  ff.;  later 
additions,  25, 147  ff.,  151  ff. 

Judges,  the  book,  3,  55  ff.,  120  ff. 

Judgment,  moral:  origin,  11; 
universality,  12;  supplemented 
by  revelation,  12  f. 

Justice.    See  Righteousness. 

Kindness:    in  Yahweh,  48,    205, 

397;  in  man,  72,  132,  146,  251, 

280  f. 
Kings,  the  books  of:  composition, 

3f.;      Deuteronomic     element, 

243  ff. 

Laban,  35,  42. 

Lamentations,  the  book:  date,  9, 
234;  composite  authorship,  234; 
ethical  features,  234  f . 

Leah,  wife  of  Jacob,  37  f.,  41,  259. 

Lemech,  20,  22  f.,  148  f. 

Lex  talionis:  application,  23,  77; 
suspension,  77  f.,  150;  modifica- 
tion, lis  f'j  167,  266. 

Loans,  118  f.,  170  f.,  219  f.,  227  f., 

265  f.,  359- 

Lot:  companion  of  Abraham, 
26;  his  hospitality,  40  f.;  his 
daughters,  32  ff.,  36,  259. 

Love:  impartial,  251,  254,  264  f., 
269,  336;  conjugal,  66,  115, 
129  f.,  204,  346  f.,  367  f.;  pa- 
rental, 36  f.,  68,  130,  393; 
filial,  39,  291;  fraternal,  40,  393. 

Loyalty,  64,  72,  118,  254  f.,  333  f. 


Magnanimity,  40,  72  f. 
Malachi,    the    book:     date, 
ethical  teaching,  285  ff. 


7; 


INDEXES 


413 


Manoah,  father  of  Samson,  59,  61. 

Marriage:  institution,  22;  of  sons 

of  God,  22;  by  purchase,  37,  57, 

66,  103,  129,  164,  286;  by 
seizure,  57  f.;  with  relatives,  5, 

67,  163,  218,  259,  262;  levirate 
unions,  34,  164  f.,  262  f.,  290  f.; 
with  foreigners,  41  f.,  61,  79, 
187,  222,  289,  360  f.;  of  priests, 
222,  261;  the  newly  wed,  182  f.; 
marriage  a  covenant,  286,  330  f., 
346  ff.,  367;  typical  significance, 
126  ff.,  203,  218. 

Messianic  King,  140  f.,  205  f., 
210  f.,  249,  253  ff.,  279  f.,  406. 

Micah,  the  prophet:  origin,  142; 
ethical  teaching,  143  ff.,  252. 

Micah,  the  book,  6,  145. 

Micaiah,  the  prophet,  84,  87  ff. 

Michal,  wife  of  David,  64,  66,  122. 

Monotheism,  88,  100  f.,  128  f., 
142, 188  f.,  191  ff.,  232  f.,  241  ff., 
255  f.,  274  ff.,  282  f.,  288  f., 
309  f.,  314  f.,  319  f.,  36s,  370, 
376,  403  ff. 

Morality  and  religion:  duty  as 
unto  God,  14;  ethical  signifi- 
cance of  the  covenant,  15;  the 
teaching  of  the  prophets,  94  f., 
132,  140,  14s  f.,  201,  218  ff., 
251  f.,  272  f.;  the  testimony  of 
the  Proverbs,  317;  the  Psalms, 
386 ff.;  the  third  decalogue, 
175  f.;  the  Law  of  Holiness, 
268  f. 

Mordecai,  373. 

Moses:  in  J,  44 f.,  47  ff-;  in  E, 
107  f.,  no,  112;  in  supple- 
mental passages,  154;  in  Deu- 
teronomy, 161  f.,  169,  183  f. 

Murder   and   homicide,     14,    20, 


55  f-,  6s,  70,  74,  77  f.,  85,  90  f., 
105,  115  f.,  122,  131,  148,  ISO, 
167  f.,  177,  206  f.,  224  f.  [Num. 
35:9—36:34],  284,  311,  334  f., 
373  f.,  394. 

Nahum,  the  prophet:    date,  192; 

ethical  teaching,  192  f. 
Nahum,  the  book,  6  f.,  192. 
Nathan,  the  prophet,  64,  68,  70, 

76  f.,  IS7,  186  f. 
Nazirites,  32,  96. 
Nehemiah,   the  governor,   367  f., 

358  ff. 

Nehemiah,  the  book.  See  Chron- 
icles. 

Nethinites,  227  ff.,  232. 

Noah,  20  f.,  32  f.,  147  f.,  152,  258. 

Oaths:  respect  for,  42,  59  f.,  70  ff., 
123;  observance  required,  177, 
2S2  f.,  390;  violation  of,  87, 118, 
129  f.,  208  f.,  229  f. 

Obadiah,  the  prophet:  date,  6; 
ethical  teaching,  284. 

Obadiah,  the  book,  6. 

Oppression,  89  ff.,  98, 139  f.,  143  f., 
157,  194,  207,  219,  223  ff.,  239, 
242  ff.,  246,  273,  287,  335,  342, 
364,  392,  395,  402  f. 

Orphan,  140,  171,  183,  251,  287, 
311,337,342,389,400. 

Patience,  34,  241,  294. 

Patriarchs:  historicity,  29  f.;  en- 
vironment, 31 ;  characters,  32  ff. 

Perfection  in  men,  29s  ff.,  301, 
306,  364. 

Philistines,  first  appearance  of,  S4- 

Pledges,  119,  171,  219,  227  f. 

Polygamy:  a  recognized  custom, 
22,  37,  66  f.,  21S,  259  f.;   evils, 


414        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 


40,  67,   155;    restrictions,   114, 
163;  opposing  influences,  330  f., 

347  f. 
Poor,  139,  i7if.,  342f.,  399f. 
Pride,  246,  318,  326,  336,  392  f. 
Priestly    Narrative:     date,    2  f.; 

content,  257  ff.,  356. 
Programs,    ethical,    besides    the 

Decalogue,     219  f.,    308,    318, 

390  ff. 
Prophets,  false,  84,  88  f.,  138,  143, 

19s  f.,  202  f.,  211  f.,  228  f. 
Prophets:  "the  Former,"  3;  "the 

Later,"  4. 
Prudence,  318  f. 
Proverbs,  the  book:   structure,  8, 

316;    date,  8;    ethical  content, 

316  ff. 
Psalms,   the  book:     structure,  8; 

date,  8;   ethical  content,  375  ff. 

Rachel,  wife  of  Jacob,  36  ff.,  41, 

104,  259. 
Rahab  of  Jericho,  57,  59,  122. 
Rebekah,  wife  of  Isaac,   27,  35, 

37  f-,  104. 

Rechabites,  32,  92,  131  f.,  203  f. 

Rehoboam,  89  f . 

Resentment:  instances,  184,  232  f., 
256,  281,  284,  289,  401  ff.;  disap- 
proval of,  212,  264  f.,  308,  336. 

Responsibility:  individual,  168, 
199  f.,  219  f.,  304  f.;  universal, 
12,  100  f.,  192  f. 

Rewards  and  penalties:  temporal 
and  material,  16  f.,  99  f.,  132, 
136  f.,  141,  147  ff.,  181  f.,  199, 
218  f.,  234,  258,  271  f.,  276  f., 
292  ff.,  320  ff.,  353  ff.,  362  f., 
376  ff.;  higher  goods,  323  f.;  a 
future  life,  303  f.,  370  f.,  381  ff. 


Reuben,  105,  354. 

Righteousness  in  Yahweh:  in  the 
sense  of  justice,  98  f.,  121,  149, 
190,  220  f.,  234  ff.,  258,  271, 
276  ff.,  28s,  294  f.,  306,  319  ff-, 
362  f.,  370  f.,  375  ff-,  396  f.;  in 
the  sense  of  deliverance,  132, 
237  f.,  270  f.,  277  f.,  285,  384  ff., 
396  f.;  doubts  on  the  subject, 
197  ff.,  285,  300,  303  ff.,  363  ff., 
377  ff.;  indiscriminate  penalties, 
49  f.,  60  f.;  executive  clemency, 
151  f.,  158  f.,  239  f. 

Righteousness  in  man:  in  a  com- 
prehensive sense,  106,  151,  192, 
219  ff.,  226,  252,  268  ff.,  276, 
280,  287,  295,  297,  306,  308, 
318  ff.,  337  ff.,  342,  364  ff-, 
376  ff.,  388  ff.,  398  ff.;  in  the 
sense  of  justice,  75  ff.,  89  ff.,  95, 
98  f.,  118,  139  ff.,  143,  146,  156, 
169  f.,  178,  190  f.,  205  f.,  215  f., 
219  f.,  223,  244,  251,  254,  271  ff., 
729  f.,  287,  308,  328,  334  f.,  394; 
in  the  sense  of  kindness,  132; 
a  vicarious  virtue,  152,  221, 
241. 

Rizpah,  Saul's  concubine,  58,  68. 

Robbery,  139,  145,  155  f.,  191, 
207,  220,  226,  287,  308,  311, 
337,  342. 

Ruth,  the  book:  literary  charac- 
ter, 9;  object  of  author,  9,  290; 
ethical  lesson,  291  f. 

Sacrifice  and  ceremonial,  94  f,, 
132,  140,  14s  f-,  175  f.,  201, 
218,  251  f.,  268  f.,  272  f.,  288, 
317,  349  f.,  356,  386  ff. 

Saint,  370,  388  f. 

Samson,  56  f.,  62. 


INDEXES 


415 


Samuel,  the  seer:  in  J  and  E,  121; 

in  later  stories,  153  ff. 
Samuel,  the  books  of:  composition, 

3;  Deuteronomic  element,  213. 
Sanehat,  story  of,  31. 
Sarah,  wife  of  Abraham:  in  J,  36, 

38,43;  inE,  103;  inP,  259. 
Satan.    See  Adversary. 
Saul:   in  J,  58,  60  f.,  63  f.,  70  ff., 

74,    78  f.;     in    E,    121  ff.;     in 

redactional     passages,     153  ff., 

157,  159  f. 

Scribes:  as  historians,  185,  187  f.; 
as  legislators,  209  ff. 

Self-control,  326  f. 

Self-sacrifice,  S4ff.,  65,  i96f.,  241  f. 

Serpent,  23  f.,  87. 

Servant  of  Yahweh:  character, 
240  f.;  a  new  ideal,  241  f. 

Sheol,  abode  of  the  dead,  49,  188, 
302,  304,  312,  370,  381  ff. 

Sin,  sense  of,  152  f.,  158  f.,  180, 
221,  234,  239  f. 

Slander,  118,  209,  225  f.  [Lev. 
19:16],  340  f.,  390,  398. 

Slavery,  204,  358  f. 

Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  33,  151  f., 
202,  222,  247. 

Sodomy,  57,  162  f.,  215. 

Sojourner,  171,  183,  251,  267; 
as  distinguished  from  foreigner, 
172,  183  f. 

Solomon:  early  character,  65  f., 
89  f.;  his  wisdom,  78;  his 
policy,  89  f.,  156  f.;  his  harem, 
67,  215,  217;  Chronicler's  ac- 
count. 

Song  of  Solomon:  literary  char- 
acter, 9;  date,  9;  interpreta- 
tions, 345  f.;  ethical  signifi- 
cance, 346  ff. 


Sorcery,  118,  287. 

Suffering:  penal,  11,  99  f.,  121, 
i48ff.,  234ff.;  disciplinary,  240, 
276  f.,  292  f.,  295,  312,  324, 
364  ff.,  370,  379  f.;  vicarious, 
240  ff. 

Tale-bearing,  336,  340  f . 

Tamar,  the  Canaanitess,  33  f.,  36, 

230. 
Tamar,  sister  of  Absalom,  67  ff. 
Theft,  104,  108,  114,  117  f.,  131, 

169,  177,  207  f.,  264,  337,  395  f. 
Treachery,  55,  131,  190,  209,  246, 

281,  286,339,  398  f. 
Trustworthiness  in  general,  208, 

28of.,  338ff.,  396ff. 

Unfortunate  classes,  98,  118  f., 
139  f.,  170  f.,  220,  251,  272  f., 

287,305,308,311,3995. 
Uriah,   the  Hittite,   65,    70,   80, 
186  f.,  215,351. 

Violence,  49,  55, 85, 98, 149, 190  f., 
206  f.,  223  ff.,  258,  335  f.,  394  ff. 

Vows:  in  general,  169  [Eccles. 
5:4f.,  Ps.  76:11];  of  women, 
266. 

Widow,  140,  171,  183,  251,  287, 
311,342,389,400. 

Wisdom:  content  of,  316  ff.;  its 
appeal,  325. 

Wine:  discovery,  21;  customary 
use,  313,  327  f.,  393;  absti- 
nence, 32  f.,  203  f.,  222,  260; 
abuse,  96,  129,  137  f.,  143,  155, 

251,  327  f-,  393. 
Witness,  false,  87,  118,  170,  177, 
340,  398.  :,>^:;    (1^ 


4i6        THE  ETHICS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT 


Woman:  original  condition,  22;  in- 
feriority, 22, 37, 57  f.,  66, 85, 104, 
108,  114,  266,  364;  exceptional 
individuals,  58,  68,  72  f.,  85;  a 
better  opinion,  129,  329  f.,  346; 
heir  of  sonless  father,  266. 

Zechariah,  the  prophet:  date,  250; 
ethical  teaching,  251  £f.,  264. 


Zechariah,  the  book:    authorship 

7;  additions,  278,  280,  282. 
Zephaniah,  the  prophet,  188  £f. 
Zephaniah,  the  book:    additions, 

7;  date,  188. 
Zerubbabel:  in  Haggai,  249  f.;  in 

Zechariah,  252  ff. 
Zophar,   the   Naamathite,    298  f., 

304,  306. 


II.     BOOKS  CITED,  OTHER  THAN  COMMENTARIES 

Hehrdische  Archd 


Benziger,  J 

ologie,  58. 
Breasted,  J.  H.;  History  of  Egypt, 

54. 
Budde,  Karl;  Sacred  Books  of  the 

Old  Testament,  Samuel,  78  f. 

Colenso,  J.  W.;  The  Pentateuch, 
194. 

Cornill,  C.  H.;  Einleitung  in  die 
kanonischen  Biicher  des  Alten 
Testaments,  Eng.  Ed.,  5, 198. 

Gressmann,  H.;  Zeitschrift  fiir  die 
alttestamentliche     Wissenschaft, 
30- 

de  Lagarde,  Paul;  Prophetce  Chal- 
daice,  275. 

Moore,  G.  F 
lica,  61. 


Encyclopedia  Bib- 


Peters,  J.  P.;  Early  Hebrew  Story, 

29. 
Petrie,    W.    M.    F.;     History   of 

Egypt,  53  f. 

Records  of  the  Past,  2,  31,  53. 
Rohling,  A. ;  Tiibinger  theologische 
Quartalschrift,  1867,  127, 

Smith,  H.  P.;  Old  Testament  His- 
tory, 29,  90. 

Torrey,  C.  C;  Notes  on  the 
Aramaic  Part  of  Daniel,  369. 

Weber,  Ferd.;  System  der  altsyna- 
gogalen  paldstinischen  Theo- 
logie,  152. 

Wellhausen,  Julius;  Die  Composi- 
tion des  Hexateuchs,  4;  Skizzen 
und  Vorarbeiten,  V,  127. 


III.    PASSAGES  SPECIALLY  DISCUSSED 


Genesis:  2:1,23;  2:17,24;  3:10, 

24  f.;     4:17,     21;      20:4,     14; 

31:46,42. 
Exodus:  5:1,  108;  chap.  18,  no; 

21:23-25,    116;     22:15b,    118; 

22:23  ^i^d  27,  in;   22:25,  227; 

22:25a,  119;   23:3,  118. 


Deuteronomy:    17:9,216;   19:17, 

170. 
Judges:   1:3,  5  f.,  19  and  21,  187. 

I  Samuel:  2:22,  155. 

II  Samuel:  8:2,  71;  12:6,  77; 
12:31,  69;  15:18,  59:  23:20, 
72. 


INDEXES 


417 


I  Kings:    8:53,  4;    9:20-22,  217; 

12:14,90;   15:5,215;   17:1,82. 
Isaiah:     5:11,    137;     11:4,    142; 

30:20,  12;    30:15,  136;    43-'25, 

239;  46:12,237;  48:9!.,  239  f.; 

56:8,  274;  63:1,  275. 
Jeremiah:    5:3,  208;    6:13,  207; 

20:75.,  198;  33:14-18,210. 
Ezekiel:  7:23,224;  13:10,  228  f.; 

18:10,  225;    21:3,  221;    22:25, 

224;  33:25,226;  36:18,226. 
Hosea:  6:6,  132;  7:3,  131. 
Joel:  1:5,313- 
Amos:  9:8!.,  100. 
Micah:  5:3, 140. 


Habakkuk:  1:14,191;  2:15,191. 
Zechariah :  8:16,  254. 
Malachi:   1:11,288;   2:11!.,  289. 
Psahns:    i6:iof.,  382!.;    37:14, 

399  f.;  45:4,392. 
Proverbs:   11:7,321;  14:31,33s; 

19:32,321. 
Job:    11:4,   298;     12:4-10,  310; 

14:23,    302;     chap.    24,    306; 

26:1-4,     306;      31:2-4,     308; 

31:21,     308;     31:38-40,    308; 

chaps.  32-37,  312. 
Ecclesiastes:  2 :  24  f.,  367. 
Nehemiah:  5:11,319, 
Matthew:  1:23, 140. 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
THIS  BO°»-g^»^jipED  BELOW 

AN  INITIAL  FINE  OF  25  CKNTS 

THIS  BOOK  ON  ^""^Jf^^^goN  THE  FOURTH 
OVERDUE.  - 


l„tfH2li^ 


^ki^3^64-^^^^ 


.ah2_LU- 


0CT29l99^ 


2t0ct59WF 


gwn 


,lS££lR(Li£B0z:a3_ 


REC'D  LD 


jQClAMasa 


Z,^^ 


M 


aY  2     1950 


LD  21-1007n-8,'34 


YB  21618 


U.  C.BERKELEY  LIBRARIES 


COmMMmq? 


